Ngày 01/5

1/ DG Azevêdo addresses the Informal Dialogue on Investment Facilitation

Thank you Chair,

Excellencies,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Good morning. I want to start by acknowledging your success in advancing the investment facilitation initiative in recent months.

Interest and engagement is high. I understand that 86 members took part in your first meeting in March. And there is an excellent turnout today as well.

This underscores the importance of keeping this initiative open, transparent and inclusive.

The process has been innovative from the start – from launching the Informal Dialogue, to bringing trade and investment officials together at the Abuja High Level Forum, to the Joint Ministerial Statement at MC11.

As we always say, the WTO is a member-driven organization. And this is an example of members driving with a sense of purpose and direction.

With this is mind, I want to acknowledge the man in the driving seat today – Ambassador Cima – especially as this is his last meeting as Coordinator of the Informal Dialogue.

Marcelo has done a great job as Coordinator – showing the kind of energy and leadership that has become his trademark. I have no doubt that everyone here today is grateful for his efforts.

From my conversations with Marcelo and other Ambassadors, I think there are at least four important things accomplished already with this initiative.

First, it has succeeded in focusing attention on the interlinkages between trade and investment. I think there is an understanding that in today’s globalized and digitalized world it is becoming impossible to advance one without advancing the other.

The second thing you have done is to help to shift the investment debate from being all about ‘protection’ to focus more on ‘facilitation’. This is what investors, entrepreneurs, businesses tell us they most want to see addressed.

The focus of today’s meeting is improving the transparency and predictability of investment measures. This is key to improving the ease of doing business in all countries. It’s also an example of an issue where greater cooperation could potentially deliver a win-win outcome for everyone. There are parallels here with the Trade Facilitation Agreement, which has clearly inspired your work.

The third element I wanted to highlight is that this process has demonstrated what can be achieved when members of all sizes, all regions, and all levels of development work together.

This initiative was launched by developing members, with numerous LDCs on board, and it has development as a core objective – but many developed members are also fully engaged and playing a leading role. It is a shared endeavour, and this is a very important point.

The fourth and final accomplishment that I want to highlight is perhaps the most important. This initiative has demonstrated the dynamism that can be generated by getting down to business, setting doable objectives, and aiming to deliver meaningful results.

In my exchanges with business leaders they often raise this work. They are taking notice of this initiative – and the other initiatives launched in Buenos Aires – and the fact that members are working to address these issues of pressing economic importance.

Their interest is a very positive sign.

So I think you have already achieved a lot. The initiative has come a long way.

Looking ahead, as you seek to make further progress, I would urge you to remain open, transparent and inclusive.

It’s important to ensure that everyone’s concerns are taken into account. This kind of inclusivity is essential in ensuring that this work is supportive of the multilateral system.

As to where all of this leads, that is for the proponents to determine, working with the rest of the membership.

Ultimately facilitating investment is in everyone’s interest.

It is critical to expanding development, fuelling innovation, generating jobs, and achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. It’s important to get it right. And that starts with informed, open and frank debate.

So I welcome today’s session – and your ongoing discussions.

You are providing an invaluable space where all members can share ideas, understand their differences, learn from one another’s experiences, and hopefully find common ground.

So, good luck. Thank you for listening. And I look forward to hearing the results of your deliberations.

Source:wto.org

2/ South Africa launches safeguard investigation on “Other screws fully threaded with hexagon heads made of steel”

In the notification South Africa indicated, among other things, as follows:

“Interested parties must make themselves known within a period of 20 days after the initiation of the investigation.

Any information which the interested parties may wish to submit in writing and any request for a hearing before the Commission that they may wish to put forward should be submitted within 20 days following the initiation of this investigation to the Directorate: Trade Remedies I at the following address: The DTI Campus, 77 Meintjies Street, Sunnyside Pretoria, Block Uuzaji, Ground Floor, Tel: +27 12 394 3600, fax +27 12 394 0518.”

Further information is available in G/SG/N/6/ZAF/6.

What is a safeguard investigation?

A safeguard investigation seeks to determine whether increased imports of a product are causing, or is threatening to cause, serious injury to a domestic industry.

During a safeguard investigation, importers, exporters and other interested parties may present evidence and views and respond to the presentations of other parties.

A WTO member may take a safeguard action (i.e. restrict imports of a product temporarily) only if the increased imports of the product are found to be causing, or threatening to cause, serious injury.

Source:wto.org

 

 

3/ US, EU safeguard actions under discussion at WTO committee meeting

Recent safeguard actions by the United States and the European Union drew WTO members’ attention at a 23 April meeting of the WTO’s Committee on Safeguards. Delegations also reviewed more than a dozen other safeguard actions taken by members.

Eight WTO members – Korea, the Philippines, the European Union, China, Singapore, Switzerland, Norway and Malaysia – took the floor to express concerns about the recent US decision to impose safeguard tariffs on imported solar cells while three members voiced similar concerns regarding a separate US safeguard targeting imported large residential washers (G/SG/N/10/USA/7 and G/SG/N/10/USA/8).  Several said there was insufficient justification for the measures while others said they were concerned the United States was now resorting to a trade remedy which it had refrained from using in the past.

The United States said the investigations into both products were carried out in a very open and transparent manner. WTO members were given ample opportunity to present written arguments and to consult with the US on its actions under the Safeguards Agreement, with those requesting consultations holding talks with the US from February to April. The US then submitted to the WTO joint notifications with these members on the outcomes of these consultations. The US said that in regards to the solar cells safeguard, it was still considering requests for product exclusions and that it expected an announcement on this in the coming months.

Eight WTO members – Korea, Turkey, Argentina, China, Egypt, Viet Nam, Chile and India – criticized the European Union’s decision on 26 March to initiate a safeguard investigation on imports of certain steel products (G/SG/N/6/EU/1).  Several said the EU failed to show a sharp and significant increase in the targeted products and injury to domestic producers which would justify the launch of an investigation, and that the EU move contributed to the problem of growing protectionism worldwide.

The European Union noted that its safeguard investigation was still in the initial phase, with interested parties being registered and questionnaires completed. It stressed the investigation would be carried out in line with WTO requirements.

Five WTO members – the United States, the European Union, Argentina, Australia and New Zealand – voiced concerns about Chile’s initiation of a safeguard investigation on imports of powdered milk and Gouda cheese, particularly with the speed of the investigation and lack of apparent support from the local industry. Chile said there were exceptional circumstances justifying the investigation.

The European Union and Japan expressed concern about India’s safeguard investigation on imported solar cells. India stated that its investigation will be carried out in line with WTO rules.

Members also reviewed safeguard actions taken by Costa Rica, Indonesia, Jordan, Turkey, Viet Nam, Zambia and Ukraine.

China voiced concerns about the recent decision by the United States to impose tariffs on imports of steel and aluminium products under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. China said the US action damages the stability of the multilateral trading system. The Russian Federation, Venezuela, Turkey, Norway, Switzerland, India and Singapore also commented on the US action. The United States said the tariffs were taken for national security reasons and were not a safeguard action; thus there were no grounds for requests from members for consultations with the US on the matter under the Safeguards Agreement.

Invoking Article 13.1(e) of the Safeguards Agreement, Thailand asked the committee to discuss and find whether the concessions suspended by Turkey in response to a Thai safeguard measure on hot rolled steel products (originally imposed in 2014) was of a “substantially equivalent” level. The chair stated that he will ask his successor to hold informal consultations on this matter.

The committee concluded by appointing Mr Hyouk Woo Kwon (Korea) as the new chair of the committee for 2018.

Next meeting

The next meeting of the Committee on Safeguards is provisionally scheduled for 23 October 2018.

Background

Under the WTO’s Safeguards Agreement, a member may restrict imports of a product temporarily (take “safeguard” actions) through higher tariffs or other measures if its domestic industry is seriously injured, or threatened with serious injury, due to a surge in imports. An import surge justifying safeguard action can be a real increase in imports; or it can be an increase relative to the domestic industry’s production, even if the import quantity has not increased.
In principle, safeguard measures apply to all imports and not just those from a particular country (developing countries accounting for less than 3% of exports are excluded from a measure). Under defined circumstances, an exporting country can seek compensation for lost trade through consultations or, if no agreement is reached, it can raise tariffs on exports from the country that is enforcing the safeguard measure.

Source:wto.org

 

4/ First WTO workshop on notification of quantitative restrictions

A total of 30 capital-based officials from developing and least-developed countries (LDCs) took part on 24-26 April in the first WTO Capacity Building Workshop on the Notification of Quantitative Restrictions (QRs). The workshop was also attended by Geneva-based delegates interested in learning more about one of the key provisions of the multilateral agreements for trade in goods.

Generally speaking, QRs are prohibitions or restrictions other than tariffs and other taxes that are imposed on imports or exports, which can be implemented through several policy measures. While QRs are generally prohibited, they are allowed by the WTO as exceptions and many WTO members use them to fulfil certain legitimate objectives, such as the protection of the environment or of human, plant and animal health. The QR notification seeks to provide transparency by members on the implementation of such measures, including on their WTO justification.

Staff from six divisions of the WTO contributed to the workshop, covering a wide range of topics, such as the review of relevant provisions in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and other WTO agreements, what WTO jurisprudence has said about GATT Article XI (General Elimination of Quantitative Restrictions), the differences and commonalities between QRs and other WTO notifications, and the main sources of information and databases that exist about these types of measures. Participants also had the opportunity to exchange views throughout the workshop and to share experiences on how to improve national coordination in the preparation of QR notifications.

Capital-based officials benefitted from technical working sessions with experts from the WTO Secretariat, where they were coached on preparing draft notifications, and had the opportunity to attend the first formal meeting of the Market Access Committee of the year.

This workshop was organized by the Market Access Division at the request of the Committee on Market Access, with the aim to improve the quantity and quality of notifications of quantitative restrictions.

Background on QRs

Article XI of the GATT 1994 is the main provision regulating quantitative restrictions. The scope of this provision includes all prohibitions or restrictions other than tariffs or other taxes applied or maintained by a WTO member on the importation or exportation of goods, which can be made effective through quotas, import or export licensing procedures, or other measures. Although Article XI of the GATT provides for the general elimination of quantitative restrictions, they are allowed in certain specific circumstances.  Members’ notifications of quantitative restrictions seek to provide transparency on these measures, including on their WTO justification.

For more information:

Webpage on quantitative restrictions

WTO Analytical Index, Jurisprudence and Practice on Articles XI and XIII of the GATT 1994

Source:wto.org

 

5/ Steel, fisheries subsidies take centre stage at committee meeting

Subsidies and overcapacity in the steel sector as well as fisheries subsidies were once again a focus of discussions at the meeting of the WTO’s Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM) on 24 April.

Subsidies and overcapacity

The United States presented a joint paper (G/SCM/W/575) on behalf of itself, Canada, the European Union, Japan and Mexico calling for the SCM committee to consider the impact of below-market financing  – specifically, low-cost lending by state-owned banks to state-owned industries to boost demand during times of severe recession, and subsequent steps to convert the loans provided to equity (e.g. debt-to-equity conversions) – in contributing to overcapacity in steel and other industries.

The result of these actions is distortions in the domestic market that spill over into the international economy and distort international trade patterns, the proponents said. The immediate question is how should WTO subsidy disciplines be improved and strengthened to address this. Members should consider whether below-market financing should be subject to stronger subsidy disciplines and how to improve transparency obligations for the reporting of such subsidies, the United States said.

Several members underlined the need to address the problem of overcapacity, with most of them voicing support for addressing the issue in the committee.

China reiterated its belief that the SCM committee was not the appropriate forum to discuss overcapacity issues and that the problem was not subsidies but the slow recovery of the global economy since 2009 and sluggish demand; G20 leaders have confirmed the need to address this issue and that a solution required global cooperation. China said it was making a contribution by reducing excess capacity in its domestic steel sector and reducing jobs. The Russian Federation said it was premature to consider possible additional WTO subsidy disciplines, noting the G20 Global Forum on Steel Excess Capacity is addressing the issue.

Fisheries subsidies

Australia, the European Union, the United States, Iceland, New Zealand and Norway all took the floor to underline the importance for members in meeting their commitments under paragraph 2 of the Buenos Aires Ministerial Decision on Fisheries Subsidies. Paragraph 2 states that members “re-commit to implementation of existing notification obligations under Article 25.3 of the (ASCM) thus strengthening transparency with respect to fisheries subsidies”.

Several members underlined the importance of submitting timely and complete notifications and implementing commitments under the Buenos Aires Ministerial Decision; one member noted that more than half the membership failed to meet the deadline for submitting their 2017 subsidy notifications, and others have not included any information on their fisheries subsidies, including some of the world’s largest fishing nations.

Continued concerns about missing subsidy notifications

The chair of the SCM committee, Ieva Baršauskaitê (Lithuania), once again voiced concern with the poor compliance in submitting required subsidy notifications. Under Article 25 of the ASCM, members must notify any subsidy – as defined under Articles 1.1 and 2 of the Agreement – that is granted or maintained within their territories. Members must submit subsidy notifications no later than 30 June of each year.

The chair reported that, unfortunately, compliance with the obligation to notify subsidies “remains discouragingly low”.  As of 24 April, 86 WTO members have not submitted their 2017 subsidy notifications, while 66 members still have not submitted their 2015 notifications. In addition, 56 members have still failed to submit notifications for 2013, with many of these members having never notified their subsidies or having only done so in the distant past.

Several members voiced their concerns about the poor state of subsidy notifications.

Revised EU legislation on protection against dumped and subsidized imports

In response to the European Union’s submission of its amended legislation on protection against dumped and subsidized imports (G/SCM/N/1/EU/2/Suppl.2), several members said they wanted to reserve their right to raise the matter at the 25 April meeting of the WTO’s Committee on Anti-dumping Practices or at the next SCM Committee meeting in October. One member said it was concerned about provisions allowing EU authorities to investigate alleged subsidies which were not identified in the application for the initiation of an investigation.

The European Union said the purpose of the amended rules was to focus on identifying significant distortions due to state interference which affects costs and the determination of normal value for anti-dumping purposes.  The elements that can be taken into account to determine significant government intervention are not exhaustive, the EU said, and it explained how the amended regulation would deal with subsidies discovered during the course of the investigation.

China

The United States once again raised concerns about China’s non-notification of possible subsidy programmes for the steel sector; company reports of the Chinese steel producers themselves show many subsidy programmes, the US said, with more recent annual reports indicating the level of support has been maintained. The European Union said notification of subsidy programmes was crucial to the effective work of the SCM committee and that China’s notification was not complete with regards to subsidies provided at the sub-central level. Other members highlighted the importance of transparency.

China said it noted the consistent concerns of the United States and the European Union on this issue. China has made great efforts to address these concerns, and said it was currently working on a new and full notification which would cover subsidies at both the central and sub-central levels.

United States

Turkey once again raised concerns about the US initiation of countervailing (CV) investigations targeting imports of iron and steel products from Turkey, while Australia said it was concerned about the US Commerce Department’s broad finding of subsidization in a countervailing investigation on silicon metal from Australia. China said it was concerned about the US practice of applying “adverse facts available” in countervailing investigations against China.

In response to Turkey, the United States said it believed its investigations were fully in line with WTO requirements. To Australia, the US said the finding that the subsidies in question were specific to the silicon metal industry was fully consistent with the ASCM. To China, the US said its application of adverse facts available was fully compatible with WTO rules.

New chair

Members confirmed the appointment of Mr Pedro Negueloaetcheverry (Argentina) as the new chair of the SCM committee for 2018.

Next meeting

The next meeting of the SCM committee is tentatively scheduled for 22 October 2018

Source:wto.org

 

6/ Registration opens for public access to oral hearing in “US — Large Civil Aircraft” appeal

At the request of the European Union and the United States in the dispute “United States — Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft (Second Complaint) — Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by the European Union” (DS353), the Appellate Body has authorized access to the oral hearing for WTO members and the general public via delayed broadcast. The video broadcast will take place at 13.00 on 8 May at the WTO’s headquarters in Geneva.

Given the participants’ request to protect certain sensitive business information, public observation will be limited to a broadcast of the opening and closing statements made at the first session of the oral hearing, which took place from 17 to 20 April. The second session of the oral hearing is due to take place at a later date, and registration for public observation of that session will be opened only upon completion of the oral hearing.

Places reserved for the public will be allocated on a first come, first served basis upon receipt of a completed registration form. Completed forms should be sent by e-mail only to: wto.abregistration@wto.org.

Applications will be accepted until 12 noon, Geneva time, on 7 May 2018. Those to whom seats have been allocated will be advised by e-mail. Those attending will need to present an official photo ID to access the viewing room. Please note that no audio/video recording will be permitted. Portable phones must be switched off throughout the broadcast. Security checks may delay access to the viewing room.

The WTO is unable to offer any support, including financial, for accommodation, flight arrangements or visas.

Only those with pre-allocated seats will be admitted.

Source:wto.org

 

7/ Members question EU on new anti-dumping regulation

The European Union had a lengthy exchange with several WTO members regarding its revised legislation on protection against dumped and subsidized imports at a meeting of the WTO’s Committee on Anti-dumping Practices on 25 April. The committee also reviewed the latest notifications of anti-dumping actions submitted by members and had exchanges regarding recent actions by China, Indonesia, Israel, Pakistan, Ukraine, the United States and Brazil.

EU regulation on protection against dumped and subsidized imports

In response to numerous questions posed by several members, the European Union delivered a statement introducing its new regulation (EU) 2017/2321 on protection against dumped and subsidized imports from non-EU countries (G/ADP/N/1/EU/3/SUPPL.2).

The Regulation, which entered into force last December, amends the previous basis upon which the European Union determined “normal value” (i.e. the home market price used as comparison to the export price in order to determine whether and to what extent dumping is taking place) for imports from non-market economy countries. This has been replaced with a new methodology for determining normal value where “significant distortions” exist, i.e. cases where reported prices or costs, including the costs of raw materials and energy, are not the result of free market forces because they are affected by substantial government intervention.

The EU intervention addressed questions regarding how the new regulation will be applied, how the EU will determine “significant distortion”, how it will calculate normal value in such circumstances, how the EU will apply “social and environmental protection” factors in selecting appropriate representative countries in determining normal value, and the preparation of EU Commission reports on significant distortions in particular countries. The EU stressed that the actual application of the new methodology will depend to a large extent on the particular circumstances of a country where the exported good originates and the extent of government intervention.

One member said the European Union’s answers raised further questions and that the amendments to the earlier EU legislation were of serious concern, particularly the concept of “significant distortion”. Another said it continued to believe the EU amendments were in violation of WTO rules, especially in the context of evolving WTO jurisprudence, while a third said the new regulation increases uncertainty for exporters. Others expressed similar concerns, while one member said that the discussion highlighted that appropriate tools are available to members under WTO rules to address certain distortions which impact international trade.

Semi-annual reports of members on anti-dumping actions

China

Japan raised concerns about a Chinese anti-dumping (AD) investigation initiated on acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber last November. China noted that the investigation is still ongoing and that China would proceed in a reasonable and objective manner strictly in line with ADA requirements.

Brazil raised concerns about China’s decision last August to initiate an investigation on imports of Brazilian broiler (chicken) products. China said it understood the importance of the Chinese broiler market for Brazilian exporters but that there has been a significant decline in domestic prices coupled with an increase in Brazil’s share of the overall market which has injured domestic producers.

Indonesia

Kazakhstan expressed concerns about Indonesia’s decision to extend an AD order on imports of hot-rolled coil from Kazakhstan, Russia and Belarus, all members of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). Indonesia said it decided to apply the measure to all EAEU customs union members to ensure the effectiveness of the AD measure and avoid circumvention of the duties.

Ukraine questioned Indonesia on its decision in March to initiate a sunset review on hot-rolled plates from Ukraine.

Israel

Turkey expressed concerns about the decision by Israeli authorities to issue a preliminary AD determination on imports of Portland cement from Turkey. Israel replied that it has not applied any provisional measure and that it would respond to Turkey’s concerns in writing.

Pakistan

Brazil quizzed Pakistan on its decision in February to impose AD duties on uncoated writing and printing paper from Brazil. Pakistan replied that it had carried out the investigation in line with requirements under the WTO’s Anti-Dumping Agreement (ADA).

Ukraine

Russia quizzed Ukraine on its decision to extend an AD order on imports of ammonium nitrate from Russia as well as its decision to initiate an AD investigation on carbamide-formaldehyde from Russia. Ukraine replied that its interim review on ammonium nitrate was in full compliance with ADA rules as well as national law, and that the ongoing investigation into carbamide-formaldehyde is being conducted in line with ADA requirements.

Turkey cited concerns about an ongoing Ukrainian investigation on imported syringe injectors from Turkey. Ukraine said Turkish exporters had an opportunity to present evidence and that public hearings will be held where they can express their views.

United States

Japan reiterated its concerns about longstanding US AD duty orders on imported Japanese goods.  The United States said that most of the measures reviewed have resulted in the termination of the dumping orders.

Indonesia voiced concerns about the US Commerce Department’s use of a practice known as “particular market situation” in its investigations, in particular on biodiesel. The United States said particular market situations existed with regards to home market sales as well as reported costs of palm oil used in biodiesel production.

Korea questioned the US use of “adverse facts available” in its AD investigations, and in particular the application of total “adverse facts available”. The United States said it was engaging on the issue with Korea bilaterally, but that it was inappropriate to comment further since the matter was currently in litigation.

Preliminary and final anti-dumping actions: notifications

Ukraine posed questions with regards to a US investigation on carbon and alloy steel wire rod from Ukraine and duties imposed on the product. The United States said that it had responded to Ukraine’s questions on the matter in writing on 23 April.

Other business

Under “other business”, Peru raised concerns regarding an investigation initiated by Brazil last December on biaxially-oriented polyethylene terephthalate (PET) from Peru and Bahrain. Brazil said it would forward Peru’s concerns back to its capital and discuss the matter bilaterally if requested.

New chair

The committee confirmed the appointment of Ms Karine Mahjoubi Erikstein (Norway) as the new chair of the committee for 2018.

Next meeting

The next meeting of the Committee on Anti-dumping Practices will take place in the week of 22 October.

Source:wto.org

 

8/ DG Azevêdo opens symposium on link between trade and natural disasters

A symposium held at the WTO’s headquarters today, 26 April 2018, provided an opportunity for participants to share ideas on how the international trade community can help countries respond to and recover from natural disasters and build resilience to such events in the future. The opening speech was delivered by WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo.

Secretary-General Sy,
Deputy Special Representative Madi,
Ambassador Lisson,
Ladies and gentlemen,

Good morning – and welcome.

We are here today to ask ourselves some very important questions:

• How can trade policies and practices help in dealing with natural disasters?
• And what could the WTO itself do to support this effort?

The UNISDR says that “disaster risk reduction is everyone’s business”.

I absolutely agree with that sentiment.

So my hope is that this Symposium will stimulate dialogue on these issues.

We need to better appreciate the nature of the hazards faced. We also must understand the work that is being undertaken to respond, to promote recovery and to foster resilience.

Today’s event is an opportunity to share ideas and explore what role the trade community may play.

And in tackling this issue, it is appropriate that we seek the views and expertise of organizations like the IFRC, UNISDR and others both within the UN and outside. So I’m very pleased to welcome our panel today. And I’d like to thank Ambassador Lisson and the Australian government for their support to take this work forward.

It may not seem immediately clear what role trade has in the debate on natural disasters – but I think we can point to some very clear elements which have been highlighted by WTO members.

At the front of our minds is the Declaration by Dominica and other Eastern Caribbean states which was made at the WTO’s 11th Ministerial Conference in December last year.

The Declaration, and plenary statements made by ministers, highlighted the catastrophic damage done in the Eastern Caribbean by last year’s hurricane season. And they pointed to the role that the multilateral trading system has to play in enabling reconstruction and rebuilding – in promoting recovery by enabling the flow of essential supplies.

This is perhaps the most obvious example of natural disasters being raised at the WTO. But when you start to look at the records, it quickly becomes clear that the issue has arisen quite regularly in our work.

For example, the economic impact of such events has featured in our Trade Policy Reviews:

• Haiti’s 2015 Review is a case in point. It discusses the 2010 earthquake and the successive storms that hit the island after the earthquake.
• The Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami appeared in Japan’s 2013 Trade Policy Review.
• And references to Hurricane Katrina were noted in past Trade Policy Reviews of the United States.

This year, the Trade Policy Review of Vanuatu is an opportunity to look at recovery from Cyclone Pam. The fact that Vanuatu’s graduation from least-developed country status had to be pushed back until 2020 is an indication of the impact that these events can have. And I should note that a project funded by the Enhanced Integrated Framework has helped in recovering from the damage caused.

In addition, amongst the list of waivers granted by the General Council, you will find Trade Preferences granted to Nepal in the wake of the April 2015 earthquake and aftershocks.

Go back further and you will find another time-limited package of tariff preferences, this time approved for Pakistan in the wake of the 2010 floods.

Natural disasters were also raised in the context of the Trade Facilitation Agreement.

I recall the words of Ambassador Conejos, who chaired the Preparatory Committee that laid the groundwork for the implementation of the Agreement. He said that the TFA “would provide an enabling environment to allow Members to respond more quickly to future crises”.

And I would also argue that there is a role for trade in resilience. Services trade is essential in providing the necessary insurance cover, for example.

Look further through the archives and I’m sure that you will find other examples too.

So it’s clear that these issues are already a common feature of our work.

We have been largely reactive however – finding solutions and highlighting problems as and when they arise. We have never taken the initiative of looking at the problem as a whole and considering beforehand how we should respond. That’s what we’re trying to do today.

Indeed, it’s important for us to have one eye on these issues because the effects of our decisions here can cut both ways. The right policy can help boost supply side capacity and restore trade after a disaster. The wrong measure could stifle recovery, erode resilience, and restrain development.

So how do we move forward from here?

There is already a body of work that we can pull together and examine. As we will hear from our speakers today, there is a tremendous amount that is going on in other bodies.

It may be helpful for us to look at this work in more detail and consider how it relates to our activities here. We could examine, for example, how it relates to our agreements. Or how it connects to other cross-cutting areas such as Trade Policy Reviews, the Aid for Trade programme, and our interactions with other organizations.

As ever, precisely how we do this is up to our members. And for clarity’s sake, we are not looking at the creation of new processes. This is more about surveying what we and others are doing and how we might improve.

But I am confident that the trade community can play a positive role in responding to this urgent issue. I am ready to support members in this effort.

Before I close, let me leave you with this final thought.

Rigorous studies suggest that the frequency and severity of natural disasters are likely to increase. This issue is not going away.

So let’s be better prepared and better informed the next time we are called upon to respond.

Thank you.

Source:wto.org

 

9/ New research project to examine role of trade in dealing with natural disasters

The WTO has launched a new research project to help countries analyse how trade can help them respond to and recover from natural disasters and build resilience to such events. The project has received a donation of CHF 110,000 from Australia following a symposium on trade and natural disasters held at the WTO’s headquarters on 26 April 2018.

The project will examine how natural disasters have had an impact on trade in the past and will assess which WTO rules and practices can help countries respond to or remain resilient to such disasters in the future. One example discussed at the symposium was the WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement, which establishes procedures for easing the flow of goods among WTO members. Services trade – such as insurance – was highlighted as an important way to cope with natural disasters while the WTO’s Trade Policy Review mechanism – a review of members’ trade policies and practices – has shown how countries have dealt with these disasters in the past. Participants agreed to explore how the WTO could help further.

The symposium highlighted the need to ensure that trade continues to flow when countries are struck by natural disasters. The ability to supply goods (e.g. food and medicine) and services (e.g. medical help and telecommunications) was identified as essential for an emergency response. Functioning markets were cited as crucial for economic recovery, and it was said that promoting resilience to such events would help to prevent extreme circumstances turning into natural disasters.

In his opening speech, WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo called on international organizations to pool their expertise into this project. The Secretary-General of the International Federation for the Red Cross Elhadj As Sy, Kirsi Madi from the United Nations Office for Disaster Reduction and Ambassador Frances Lisson of Australia also participated in the opening session. DG Azevêdo’s full speech is available here. A summary of the symposium will be published shortly.

Source:wto.org

 

10/ Introductory Trade Policy Course for least-developed countries concludes at the WTO

An Introductory Trade Policy Course for least-developed countries (LDCs) concluded on 27 April, with closing remarks delivered by Ms Bridget Chilala, Director of the WTO’s Institute for Training and Technical Cooperation. Twenty-four government officials from 16 countries attended the course held at the WTO’s headquarters in Geneva. The participants included three representatives from countries in the process of joining the WTO.

The overall objective of this three-week course was to look into a wide range of WTO issues, including from an LDC perspective. The course aimed to provide information on the structure and basic principles of the WTO as well as the main disciplines in the WTO agreements.

In addition, the course provided a broad overview of the work carried out by other trade organisations in Geneva, namely the International Trade Centre and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. The development dimension of the WTO’s work was at the centre of the programme, which included sessions on special and differential treatment provisions for developing countries in WTO agreements, technical assistance and capacity building, and an insight into the activities of the Enhanced Integrated Framework, a multi-donor agency dedicated to helping LDCs use trade as a tool for growth.

Participants took part in roundtable discussions and visited the Advisory Centre on WTO Law, based in Geneva, which provides legal advice and training to developing countries on dispute settlement proceedings. They also had the opportunity to follow two official meetings of WTO bodies, creating a strong link between trade policy theory and ongoing discussions.

The course represents a level 1 activity in the WTO’s Progressive Learning Strategy. Once completed, it serves as an entry point for more advanced WTO training activities.

The programme is available here.

List of participants:

Source:wto.org

 

11/ Training seminar on trade for journalists from French-speaking African countries concludes at WTO

Fifteen newspaper, online and TV journalists from 10 French-speaking African countries participated in the seminar, which took place at WTO headquarters in Geneva from 23 to 27 April.

(temporarily in French)

L’objectif principal était de couvrir les thématiques de négociation de l’OMC. Les participants ont pu interagir avec le Directeur Général Roberto Azevêdo et différents membres du secrétariat au sujet du rôle de l’organe de règlements de différends, le commerce électronique, le rôle des services en Afrique, le cadre intégré renforcé, l’aide pour le commerce, les défis pour l’Afrique dans le système commercial mondial, les chaines de valeur mondiales et l’agriculture.

Le séminaire était organisé par la Fondation Friedrich Ebert Stifung (FES) et l’OMC

Cette année, trois Ambassadeurs –  l’Ambassadeur Marc Vanheukelen (Union européenne), l’Ambassadeur Eloi Laourou (Bénin), Président de l’Organe d’Examen des politiques commerciales, et l’Ambassadeur Léopold Ismael Samba (République Centreafricaine), Coordinateur des Pays les moins avancés  - ont briefé les journalistes et leur ont donné leur point de vue sur la situation actuelle.

Également, les participants ont eu un aperçu du travail fait par le Bureau International du Travail, le Centre du Commerce International, la Conférence des Nations Unies sur le commerce et le développement, le Haut-Commissariat aux droits de l’homme, UNI Global Union, et le Centre Sud. La dimension du développement a été longuement évoquée pendant les différentes sessions.

Les journalistes intègrent le lien entre la théorie de la politique commerciale et les discussions en cours.

Cet échange permets à l’OMC d’informer et de former sur des thématiques techniques mais liées au quotidien de tout un chacun, comme l’étiquetage des ingrédients des produits alimentaires en passant par la législation sur le droit d’auteur et les mesures de lutte contre la grippe aviaire. Ce séminaire est un des outils fondamental du travail de l’Assistance Technique. Les journalistes une fois de retour au pays partagent dans leurs articles, reportages ou sur les réseaux sociaux les informations qui leur semblent les plus pertinentes par rapport aux priorités économiques de leurs pays. Ainsi, les disciplines de l’OMC malgré leur complexité sont accessibles au plus grand nombre.

Source:wto.org

 

12/ US files appeal against compliance panel ruling in countervailing duty dispute with China

On 27 April the United States filed an appeal against a WTO compliance panel report in a case brought by China in “United States — Countervailing Duty Measures on Certain Products from China — Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by China” (DS437).

Further information will be available within the next few days in document WT/DS437/24.

Parties to a dispute can appeal a panel’s ruling. Appeals have to be based on points of law, such as legal interpretation — they cannot re-open factual findings made by the panel. Each appeal is heard by three members of a permanent seven-member Appellate Body comprising persons of recognized authority and unaffiliated with any government. The Appellate Body membership broadly represents the geographic range of WTO membership, with each member appointed for a fixed term. Generally, the Appellate Body has up to 3 months to conclude its report.

Source:wto.org

 

13/ Regional Trade Policy Course gets under way in Kazakhstan

Twenty participants from Central and Eastern Europe, Central Asia and the Caucasus (CEECAC) began a two-month Regional Trade Policy Course (RTPC) in Almaty, Kazakhstan, on 30 April. Held in partnership with the University of International Business (UIB), the course will end on 22 June.

The twenty participants are from 11 CEECAC countries which are members or observers of the WTO. It is the second RTPC to be organized in partnership with the UIB and the Government of Kazakhstan.

The RTPC was opened with an address by Dr Darkhan Akhmed-Zaki, President of the UIB, and by Mr Roberto Fiorentino of the WTO’s Institute for Training and Technical Cooperation.

Dr Akhmed-Zaki thanked the WTO for entrusting the UIB with the implementation of the RTPC for a second consecutive year. He highlighted how the UIB’s partnership with the WTO has made a valuable contribution to trade policy capacity-building for the UIB and government officials from the region.

Mr Fiorentino thanked the UIB and the Government of Kazakhstan for their ongoing support for the WTO’s training activities. Dr Akhmed-Zaki and Mr Fiorentino ended their address by saying they hoped the participants would find the course rewarding.

RTPCs are intermediate (Progressive Learning Strategy Level 2) “generalist” training courses specifically designed for government officials from ministries/agencies dealing with trade-related issues who have already undertaken basic WTO training.  The eight-week courses take place in Africa, the Asia-Pacific, Latin America, Central Eastern Europe, Central Asia and the Caucasus, Arab-Middle East and the Caribbean and are organized by the WTO in partnership with regional academic institutions.

The courses are delivered by officials from the WTO Secretariat and by trade policy specialists and academic experts from the region. The course covers the WTO agreements and other trade issues, including regional trade policy issues. It is delivered through a combination of lectures, case studies and exercises and ends with an exam.

Source:wto.org

 

 

14/ New standard for facility management just published

Increasingly complex, the global facility management (FM) market will be worth USD 1 trillion by 2025 – and that’s just that which is outsourced. Concerned with the management, operation and maintenance of an organization’s facilities, FM is a discipline that needs to balance the rapidly changing needs and demands of the various stakeholders that it serves with effective, safe and sustainable business needs. It affects the health and well-being of all those who come in contact with an organization and covers a wide range of areas including occupancy costs (the second-highest overhead in almost every organization), use of space, maintenance, security, cleanliness, the environment and more.

ISO 41001, Facility management – Management systems – Requirements with guidance for use, has just been published to help FM teams achieve optimum efficiency. Drawing on international best practice, the new management system standard constitutes a benchmark for developing and driving an effective strategic, tactical and operational FM regime. It will also assist organizations seeking to outsource FM, as those providers who are able to demonstrate compliance with the standard will provide them with an assurance regarding their approach and processes.

Stanley Mitchell, Chair of ISO/TC 267, Facility management, the ISO technical committee that developed the standard, said ISO 41001 will assist organizations in a number of ways by establishing a common approach and a set of processes that can be referred to around the world.

“Every company, big or small, has some element of facility management. It is a complex discipline that directly affects everyone, as it is all about the spaces that we occupy and how those spaces meet the needs of the people who use them on a daily basis.

“ISO 41001 is the first standard of its kind for facility management and has the potential to make a real difference to organizations by improving workforce health and safety, reducing their impact on the environment and making considerable cost savings and efficiencies.”

The secretariat of ISO/TC 267 is held by BSI, ISO’s member for the UK. ISO 41001 is available from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

Source:iso.org

 

 

15/ How ISO standards support World Day for Safety and Health at Work

28 April is World Day for Safety and Health at Work. Celebrated under the auspices of the International Labour Organization (ILO), whose recent statistics suggest that 2.78 million people die from accidents and illnesses related to the workplace every year, its objective is to promote the prevention of occupational accidents and diseases globally.

This year’s theme, “Generation Safe & Healthy”, focuses on the need to end child labour and to improve the safety and health of young workers. According to the ILO, globally, 541 million young workers (between the ages of 15 and 24) account for 15 % of the world’s labour force. They sustain up to 40 % more non-fatal occupational injuries than do adult workers (older than 24). This is due to many factors including being less able than older and more experienced workers to assess risks, but also feeling less confident to speak up in the face of danger at work.

Moving towards safer workplaces will also help progress towards the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal N^o 8: “Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all”.

Earlier this year, ISO launched ISO 45001, Occupational health and safety management systems – Requirements with guidance for use, a standard designed to help organizations implement a management system to improve the health and safety of all workers, regardless of age or gender.

The standard provides a framework for organizations to plan what they need to put in place to minimize the risk of harm, both in terms of long-term health issues and absence from work, as well as risks that give rise to accidents in the workplace. It also requires organizations to have processes in place for the consultation and participation of workers at all levels and functions, meaning that even the most vulnerable of workers should have a voice.

In addition, the standard requires users to look at the wider context of the organization and not only focus on internal employees. “Organizations have to think about their contractors and suppliers as well as, for example, how their work might affect their neighbours in the surrounding area,” explained David Smith, Chair of ISO/TC 283, the technical committee that developed the standard. “This is much wider than simply focusing on the conditions for internal employees and means organizations cannot just contract out risk.”

To mark World Day for Safety and Health at Work, ISO Secretary-General Sergio Mujica urged organizations around the globe to think seriously about health and safety in the workplace.

Source:iso.org

 

Ngày 02/5

16/ WTO opens online registration for 2018 Public Forum

Online registration for the 2018 Public Forum is now open. Under the main theme of “Trade 2030”, the Forum’s sub-themes will be sustainable trade, technology-enabled trade, and a more inclusive trading system. The Forum will be held at the WTO headquarters in Geneva from 2 to 4 October.

Those interested in attending the Forum should complete the online registration form no later than 16 September 2018.

For more information on the theme please visit the Public Forum webpage www.wto.org/pf18 Participation at the Forum is free of charge. Travel and accommodation costs are to be borne by participants. For nationals of least-developed countries, the Geneva Welcome Centre (CAGI) provides support to individuals requiring a grant for accommodation during the Public Forum. Please follow the link to verify your eligibility and consult the procedure to be followed in order to apply for a grant.

Background

The Public Forum is the WTO’s largest annual outreach event. It provides a unique platform for heads of states, parliamentarians, leading global business people, students, academics and non-governmental organizations to come together and debate on a wide range of WTO issues and on some of the major trade and development topics of the day. Over 1,500 participants attend the Forum each year.

Should you have further questions, please contact the Public Forum Team at: pf18@wto.org.

Source:wto.org

 

17/ Turkey launches safeguard investigation on iron and steel products

On 2 May 2018, Turkey notified the WTO’s Committee on Safeguards that it initiated on 27 April 2018 a safeguard investigation on iron and steel products.

In the notification Turkey indicated, among other things, as follows:

“The interested parties are required to fill in the questionnaires within 30 (thirty) days from the date of publication of the Communiqué and forward it to the General Directorate.
[…]
The companies and institutions established in Turkey shall send the questionnaires and their official views from their official registered electronic mail-KEP address to the registered electronic mail-KEP address of the Ministry.

The address for electronic mail: ekonomi@hs01.kep.tr

Those who want to be interested parties as companies, institutions and establishments abroad shall send their answers to the questionnaires and their official views to the Ministry’s e-mail address below.

Directorate General E-mail address: ithebys@ekonomi.gov.tr

The address of the investigating authority for correspondence is:

Ministry of Economy
Directorate General for Imports, Department of Safeguards
Söğütözü Mah. 2176. Sk. No: 63 06530 Çankaya/Ankara/TURKEY
Tel:  +90 312 204 92 93-99 45-99 70-95 79
Fax:  +90 312 204 86 33 E-mail: korunma@ekonomi.gov.tr. ”

Further information is available in G/SG/N/6/TUR/24.

What is a safeguard investigation?

A safeguard investigation seeks to determine whether increased imports of a product are causing, or is threatening to cause, serious injury to a domestic industry.

During a safeguard investigation, importers, exporters and other interested parties may present evidence and views and respond to the presentations of other parties.

A WTO member may take a safeguard action (i.e. restrict imports of a product temporarily) only if the increased imports of the product are found to be causing, or threatening to cause, serious injury.

Source:wto.org

 

18/ Members intensify work to ensure full implementation of the Trade Facilitation Agreement

WTO members intensified work to ensure the full implementation of the Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA) at the 2 May meeting of the Committee on Trade Facilitation, which was followed by a dedicated session on technical assistance and support for capacity building. Members also elected a new Committee chair, Ambassador Dalia Kadišienė (Lithuania).

The Committee reviewed a total of 63 new notifications from members of their respective timetables and assistance needs to implement provisions of the TFA, import and export procedures and other information helpful for traders and governments, and details of available technical assistance and support for capacity building. During this exchange, the United States and the European Union commended several members for their ambitious implementation timetables. A few members were reminded to submit outstanding notifications. The United States, the European Union, Canada and China further suggested that members include more stocktaking discussions on the progress of TFA implementation in future Committee meetings.

Ambassador Daniel Blockert (Sweden), the outgoing chair of the Committee, said the large number of notifications from members was highly encouraging. The Secretariat, in its update to members at the meeting, further noted that a total of 136 members have completed their ratification process related to the Agreement, which is equivalent to 83% of the WTO membership. Since the last Committee meeting, 14 more members have submitted their instruments of acceptance of the TFA: Antigua and Barbuda, South Africa, Indonesia, Israel, Central African Republic, Argentina, the Plurinational State of Bolivia, Barbados, Namibia, Djibouti, Papua New Guinea, Cuba, Benin and the State of Kuwait. Several more are in the advanced stages of preparation.

A look at the overall situation shows a steady increase in commitment levels. According to the TFA Database, the current implementation rate of the Agreement stands at 59.7% as of 2 May.  Broken down by level of development, this equates to a 100 per cent implementation rate by developed members, 58 per cent among developing members and 21.2 per cent among least developed countries (LDCs).

The Agreement is unique in that it allows developing and least-developed countries to set their own timetables for implementing the TFA, communicated in a series of notifications that reflect their respective capacities. Developed countries committed to immediately implement the entire Agreement when it entered into force.

Developing countries will immediately apply the TFA provisions they have designated as Category A commitments. For the other provisions of the Agreement, they must indicate when these will be implemented and what capacity building support is needed to help them implement these provisions, known as Category B and C commitments. These can be implemented at a later date, with LDCs given more time to notify these commitments.

So far, 112 members have notified their category A commitments, approaching the overall number of notifications in this area that is likely to be received. The current number of category B commitments stands at 62 and at 52 for category C.  Ambassador Blockert said that among all members who have ratified the Agreement and for whom the TFA has taken effect, only four have not yet provided any notification – all of them LDCs.

The Committee meeting also featured an experience-sharing segment that focused on the themes of National Trade Facilitation Committees, transit, and broader implementation issues. Members compared notes on successful strategies and national issues and regional initiatives relating to the resolution of implementation challenges.

A dedicated session on technical assistance was held the next day on pertinent issues related to implementation support. Donor members presented their initiatives, often followed by corresponding interventions from recipients of their aid. The World Bank, UN Conference on Trade and Development, World Customs Organization and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development also participated in the session to provide information on technical assistance as did the Secretariat to share updates on activities of the Trade Facilitation Agreement Facility.

At the end of the session, members elected Ambassador Dalia Kadišienė (Lithuania) as their new Committee chair.

Source:wto.org

 

19/ Winners of small business video competition attend training session at Google HQ

The three small business winners of an international video competition launched by Google in partnership with the WTO and the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) travelled to Mountain View, California, on 2 May to participate in a ‘master class’ in digital skills for export organized by Google and tailored to small businesses. The visit to Google headquarters was the prize for winning the “Small Businesses Going Global Video Challenge” launched last year. The video competition was the first successful proposal under the ICC/WTO Small Business Champions initiative.

The three small business winners were Zedi, a clothing company in Accra (Ghana), My Nametags, which makes custom name tags based in London (United Kingdom) and Deering Banjo, a company that makes musical instruments based in San Diego (United States).

The aim of the training session was to give the participants greater knowledge of digital tools, a better understanding of foreign markets and the necessary skills to navigate barriers to export. Discussions also covered the localization of websites, digital marketing and other digital issues.

Juliet Ajaab from Zedi said: “The course at Google was a real eye opener for me. The tools that we were introduced to are just what my business needs to break through the barriers we have to go global. The benefits of a good digital presence are not new to me but right now I know what my business is missing and can’t wait to venture into new areas.” Juliet’s winning video described how the Internet has helped her to overcome a disability and grow her business in a way that was impossible a few years ago.

Lars Anderson from My Nametags said: “My Nametags was delighted to be one of the winners of the competition held by Google under the WTO/ICC initiative last year, and we really enjoyed the opportunity to travel to Google’s California headquarters for a very insightful conference. Thank you to the Google team who made us feel welcome and shared their insights. We have a series of new initiatives that we will take back and implement at My Nametags to help us grow in the future.”  My Nametags’ winning video described how their small business uses a wide range of digital tools to sell in 127 countries.

Jamie Latty from Deering Banjo Co. said: “It was such an honour to be in the same room as so many amazing minds. The Google team made some wonderfully informative presentations, which armed me with a lot of information. They also highlighted some tools that I was not aware of, the most important of which is Google’s Market Finder tool. A one stop shop of extremely valuable information about different markets, as they pertain to my product. Fantastic! It was a huge eye opener to what is available to us and how much effort Google are putting into helping their partners succeed.” Deering Banjo’s video described how a 40-year old family-run business has used the Internet to find new growth for America’s original folk instrument.

Google’s Head of Global Trade Policy, David Weller, said: “We know the statistics about the trade power of the Internet, and how small businesses online are five times more likely to export.  But to meet these small businesses was inspiring — both to hear how they are using the Internet today to ‘punch above their weight’, and to see how much additional potential there is with the right tools and policies.”

The competition, launched in September 2017, invited micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) to share their stories, through a short video, about how they have used internet technologies to participate in trade. Numerous videos from around the world were submitted, showing how MSMEs are using these new technologies to trade in sectors ranging from flower selling in Kenya to marketing services in Spain and photographic services in Ghana.

The announcement of the winners was made at a Business Forum held in the margins of the WTO’s 11th Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires in December 2017.

Source:wto.org

 

20/ Education sector to benefit from a new international management system standard

From pre-school to university, to vocational training and coaching, the world of learning is constantly changing and evolving. As the trend to move away from the traditional customer-supplier relationship towards a collaborative partnership grows, so, too, do learners’ expectations. Learning providers now need to adapt to these new ways of working, while at the same time providing a high level of service.

ISO 21001, Educational organizations – Management systems for educational organizations – Requirements with guidance for use, is intended to meet this challenge by defining the requirements of a management system that will help education providers better meet the needs and expectations of their learners and other beneficiaries, and demonstrate greater credibility and impact.

Developed by project committee ISO/PC 288, the new International Standard focuses on the specific interaction between an educational institution, the learner and other customers.

Educational organizations will benefit through delivering a more impactful and relevant learning experience that is aligned with the organization’s own mission and vision. Learners will benefit even more because the education service they receive can be more personalized and suited to their needs, ultimately leading to better learning outcomes.

By making available a comprehensive set of practices that are applicable to learning service providers across the board, ISO 21001 will help build a stronger education sector and provide positive knock-on effects in terms of stimulating innovation and the economy.

ISO 21001 is available from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

Source:iso.org

 

21/ RCEP deal: Trade ministers from 16 countries including India and China to meet in Vietnam

Trade ministers of 16 countries, including India and China, will meet on 21 and 22 May in Vietnam to discuss progress in the ongoing negotiations of proposed mega trade deal RCEP.

So far, negotiators of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) have held 18 rounds of negotiations.

“This will be a crucial meeting in Hanoi. Ministers would deliberate on the single-tier system of duty relaxations, besides issues related to services and investments,” an official said.

Under the single-tier system, the RCEP member countries are trying to finalise the maximum number of goods on which duties will either be eliminated or reduced drastically.

Chief negotiators and senior officials of all the countries recently held discussions in the Philippines on this regard.

The 16-member bloc RCEP comprises 10 ASEAN members (Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, Singapore, Thailand, the Philippines, Laos and Vietnam) and their six FTA partners — India, China, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand.

RCEP is a mega trade deal that aims to cover goods, services, investments, economic and technical co-operation, competition and intellectual property rights.

As the domestic industry has apprehensions over a deluge in imports from countries such as China after the duty cut under the agreement, India may take certain deviations for such countries.

India already has implemented a free trade agreement with the ASEAN, Japan and South Korea. On the other hand, the country is negotiating similar pacts with Australia and New Zealand.

The talks for the pact started in Phnom Penh in November 2012. The 16 countries account for over a quarter of the world’s economy, estimated to be more than $ 75 trillion.

Source: First Post

 

Ngày 03/5

22/ DG Azevêdo launches report on role of trade in advancing the Sustainable Development Goals

WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo met United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres today (3 May) to present him with a new WTO report on how trade is contributing to achieving the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The meeting took place at the UN Chief Executives Board session in London. The Director-General addressed the meeting on the current challenges faced by the international community in achieving the SDGs, including the need to resolve the current tensions between some trading partners.

The new publication — entitled “Mainstreaming trade to attain the SDGs” — looks at how engaging in international trade can help countries gain access to new markets and new investments, therefore boosting growth, raising living standards and promoting sustainable development.

The Director General said: “Trade has proved itself to be a powerful force for growth and development around the world. It played a crucial role in the early achievement of the Millennium Development Goal to halve the number of people living in extreme poverty. Now we are working to ensure that trade contributes again in meeting the Sustainable Development Goals. WTO members took a big step forward with the 2015 agreement to abolish agricultural export subsidies, which delivered a key target of the SDG on Zero Hunger. This new report examines a wide range of other ways that trade can contribute to this global mission — from tackling harmful fisheries subsidies to boosting the economic capacity of least-developed countries to maintaining and strengthening the multilateral trading system in order to provide the platform of stability and certainty upon which growth and development will continue to rely.”

The report looks at the SDGs from economic, social and environmental perspectives and outlines how trade is contributing to making progress in each of these areas, including through reducing poverty, improving health and tackling environmental degradation.

It outlines a number of steps to help accelerate progress in achieving the SDGs. This includes governments embedding trade policies into their national development plans to spread the benefits of trade more widely and strengthening the multilateral trading system. It also includes action to further lower the costs of world trade, notably by implementing the WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement, which establishes procedures for streamlining the flow of goods among WTO members.

Source:wto.org

 

23/ Mexico’s ITAM University launches new book on WTO dispute settlement

A new book entitled “Public Private Partnership for WTO Dispute Settlement: Enabling Developing Countries” was launched at Mexico’s Instituto Tecnologico Autonomo (ITAM), a member of the WTO Chairs Programme, on 3 May. The book is authored by the Co-Chair at ITAM, Dr Amrita Bahri.

Participants at the event included Prof. Gregory Shaffer (Chancellor’s Professor, University of California, Irvine), Prof. Henry Gao (Professor, Singapore Management University), Ambassador Fernando de Mateo (Director General, Evaluation of Economic Projects, Secretaría de Economía, Mexico), Lic. Diego de Mateo (Founding Partner, AGON Law Firm), Prof. Gabriel Gari (Professor, Queen Mary University of London), Prof. Jorge Cerdio (Dean, ITAM University Law Department) and Prof. Bradly Condon (Professor and WTO Chair, ITAM University).

The publication examines how interaction between business entities and public officials can enable developing countries to effectively utilize the provisions of the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU). Building on more than five years of empirical investigation, the author reflects on the dispute settlement partnership experiences of the top DSU users from the developed and developing world.

The book evaluates a diverse range of dispute settlement partnership strategies which have allowed the governments involved to harness resources and expertise from the private sector. With practical suggestions on dispute settlement capacity building, the book provides a roadmap to policy makers, industry representatives and legal professionals on how to effectively engage with business entities for the resolution of international trade conflicts. It also provides a template for teaching and research activities to scholars focusing on international trade law, development studies and international dispute settlement.

Source:wto.org

 

24/ New technical specification for auditors of ISO 45001

ISO 45001, Occupational health and safety management systems – Requirements with guidance for use, made standardization history when it was published in March this year. Now, a new complementary technical specification – ISO/IEC TS 17021-10 – has just been published, defining the required skills and knowledge of those bodies auditing organizations that have implemented the health and safety standard.

ISO/IEC TS 17021-10, Conformity assessment – Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of management systems – Part 10: Competence requirements for auditing and certification of occupational health and safety management systems, is intended to guarantee a harmonized approach to the accreditation of an ISO 45001 certification.

The new technical specification is aimed at auditors, or anyone making certification decisions related to ISO 45001, and will ultimately serve certification, accreditation and regulatory bodies by confirming that auditing and certification decisions related to ISO 45001 have been carried out by those who have the competence to do so.

Catherine Montagnon, Co-Convenor of the working group in charge of ISO/IEC TS 17021-10 and Head of the French delegation involved in developing ISO 45001, explained that many of those responsible for the development of the technical specification also contributed to the writing of ISO 45001, providing the benefit of their extensive knowledge and experience.

“ISO 45001 contains a number of requirements for which specific skills related to occupational health and safety are required to audit it effectively, such as those relating to terminology, principles, concepts, tools and techniques,” she said.

“Therefore, it is necessary to have a dedicated conformity assessment document to ensure auditors have the right skills to do the job well.”

Source:iso.org

 

Ngày 04/5

25/ Ukraine and Israel initiate FTA agreement

Ukraine and Israel have technically initialed an agreement on the free trade area (FTA), Deputy Minister of Economic Development and Trade, Trade Representative of Ukraine Natalia Mykolska has said.

“This is a technical but important procedural issue that enables us to conduct legal reconciliation of the text of the agreement for further translation it into three languages and prepare the agreement for signing,” she wrote in the Facebook social network on Friday.

Mykolska said that before signing the agreement, the parties have no legal obligations.

As reported, Ukraine and Israel completed talks on the signing of the FTA agreement. The agreement foresees the annulment of import duties for 80% of industrial goods from Ukraine to Israel and some agricultural products within quotas. There will be a gradual cancellation of import duties during the transitional periods – three, five and seven years. After these terms end, the duties will be leveled to nil. A certain category of goods falls under partial liberalization.

In turn, Ukraine opens 70% of the industrial goods market for Israeli producers and also abolishes duties on a number of agricultural products immediately after the FTA agreement enters into force, for some products – within three or five years. In particular, Ukraine will partially reduce tariffs for certain seasonal vegetables and fruits from Israel.

 Source: Interfax- Ukraine

 

26/ S. Korean delegation to take part in RCEP talks in Singapore

South Korean delegates will head to Singapore to participate in the latest round of talks for the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), a proposed mega trade deal involving Asian nations, Seoul’s trade ministry said Thursday.

RCEP is in essence a massive regional trade deal between 10 members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the six countries with which ASEAN has existing free trade agreements — South Korea, China, Japan, India, Australia and New Zealand.

Kim Jung-il, Seoul’s FTA policy official, will lead the delegation to join the 22nd round of negotiations to be held in Singapore from May 4-8, the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy said.

About 70 working-level officials in 14 divisions will seek ways to lower tariffs and trade barriers, and discuss details in the intellectual property and the rules of origin sectors with representatives from other member states.

Seoul has been seeking to expand trade with Southeast Asian nations and India amid concerns over rising protectionist practices and intensifying trade tensions between the United States and China, South Korea’s two biggest trading partners.

China has been pushing for a rapid conclusion to RCEP with a deal mainly focused on lowering tariffs, while Japan and ASEAN countries have demanded a more comprehensive deal covering services and investment.

RCEP, if signed, will be one of the largest regional free trade arrangements as the member states accounted for half of global production, as well as 32 percent of global gross domestic product and 29 percent of global trade, as of 2016, according to the trade ministry.

Source: Yonhap

27/ TPP opponents keep fighting as MPs scrutinise deal- New Zealand

The revised Trans Pacific Partnership is back in parliament, with the controversial deal now being scrutinised by Members of Parliament (MPs).

Eleven submitters fronted up to the parliamentary committee hearing on the legislation for the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) today.

The submitters fell into two distinct groups with supportive exporters focused on the trade benefits, while other submitters concentrated on the loss of national sovereignty.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) kicked off proceedings with the lead TPP negotiator, Vangelis Vitalis, telling MPs that the deal was a beacon for open markets at a time when many countries were erecting barriers.

Mr Vitalis said 3200 new protectionist measures have been installed since the global financial crisis, “and since 2015 we’ve had a 30 percent spike in protectionist measures”.

MFAT’s national interest analysis estimated the new TPP would result in $92 million in tariff savings as soon as the agreement came into force, rising to at least $222m a year once it was fully implemented.

The other four pro-TPP submitters, including Nick Kirton from kiwifruit exporter Zespri, all emphasised that it would allow them to compete on a level platform against foreign rivals in lucrative markets like Japan.

“New Zealand kiwifruit paid $27m worth of duties into Japan alone. The CPTPP will see these tariffs eliminated on entry into force which is fantastic news for our growers,” Mr Kirton said.

“And this means we will be able to maintain our competitive position in Japan.”

Dairy Companies Association of New Zealand executive director Kimberley Crewther said Japanese butter lovers would also be relieved, given protection has led to limited supplies in the world’s third biggest economy.

“Consumers will also look forward to some alleviation through the quota expansion to ensure that they don’t need to continue the rationing of butter within their market, which as occurred in recent years.

“Hard to imagine that that’s necessary in today’s time,” Ms Crewther said.

TPP opponents were less focused on trade gains, which some think are relatively miniscule anyway, and more worried about its effect on civil society and the government’s right to regulate in the national interest.

Rianna Maxwell from the Wellington Justice Project questioned government assurances that Māori interests would be protected by the Treaty of Waitangi.

“Although the CPTPP does contain an exception clause, which allows the Crown the ability to protect the interest of Māori guaranteed under the Treaty of Waitangi, international parties to the CPTPP also have the ability to challenge this in some circumstances, which could limit its effect in protecting their rights.”

Oliver Hailes from the anti-TPP network It’s Our Future said the trade pact was being rushed through parliament with indecent haste and with no proper analysis.

“MFAT’s national interest analysis is incomplete and wrong in parts,” he said.

“There ought to have been independent sectoral analyses of the kind that the parties now in Government called for when in opposition.

The select committee asked few questions, though National MP and former Trade Minister Todd McClay consistently made the point that the new TPP was little changed from the old one.

The government aims to ratify the agreement by early next year at the latest.

Source: Radionz

 

Ngày 07/5

28/ Azevêdo urges members to seek urgent solutions on systemic challenges

At a meeting of the full WTO membership today (7 May), Director-General Roberto Azevêdo urged members to step up their engagement towards tackling a number of systemic challenges. The Director-General also reported on his recent consultations with members on a range of issues.

The Director-General said:

“Concerns about rising trade tensions and the blockage in appointments to the Appellate Body are very widely shared among the membership. As long as tensions persist between major trading partners, the risk of a serious escalation remains very real. We must do all we can to avoid going down this path and taking measures that are difficult to reverse. When trade restrictions are pursued in this way it can threaten growth and job creation everywhere. Today two thirds of global trade takes place through global value chains – and this clearly illustrates the potential for knock-on effects. And in these situations it is often the smaller players and the poorest communities that stand to lose the most. Resolving these issues is in everyone’s urgent interest.

“I am continuing to talk to members, and urge all sides to be very cautious in how they proceed. It is positive that these matters are being taken up in the regular bodies of the WTO. The issues have been discussed in the Safeguards Committee and in the Council on Trade in Goods, for example, as well as in the General Council. In addition, members continue to bring their disputes to the WTO. The system was built to resolve these problems in a way that prevents further escalation – and so it is right that members are using it. I believe that the WTO has a crucial role to play here – as we have done many times before.

“I also encourage members to continue pursuing their bilateral contacts, to complement multilateral processes. The important thing is that conversations are taking place, and that members are trying to find solutions.

“It is also of utmost importance that members work to resolve the impasse regarding nominations for the Appellate Body. If we do not find a solution here – whatever shape that solution may take – we could severely compromise the whole multilateral trading system. I can’t emphasize enough the systemic importance of this point. So again I urge members to engage and talk to each other in a solution-finding mode.”

Regarding the WTO’s ongoing negotiating work, the meeting heard reports from the Chairs of the Negotiating Groups. The Director-General commented that “we are still in early stages of our work after Buenos Aires, but I think it is very positive to see members meeting and engaging. And I think that we need to maintain a sense of urgency. This applies particularly in areas where we have specific deadlines, such as in fisheries subsidies – but also in areas where we are already behind the schedule that members set themselves, for example on public stockholding.”

Source: wto.org

 

29/ Iran wants FTA with Pakistan

Consul General of Islamic Republic of Iran to Karachi, Ahmad Muhammadi has said that Iran is looking for signing free trade agreement (FTA) with Pakistan, which will benefit both the neighbouring countries.

For increasing the bilateral trade, among other supportive steps, both the countries should establish banking channel, he said while speaking in a meeting with members of Korangi Association of Trade and Industry (KATI) here at the association’s office, a KATI press release said. The Iranian diplomat said bilateral trade is also facing tariff barriers and hoped that all hurdles will be removed soon.

KATI president Tariq Malik said there is a great potential for improving the bilateral trade and economic cooperation. Both the governments should take more practical steps including exchange of trade delegations and business information.

Masood Naqi said private sector is ready to play its role for banking channel. He also urged for the business delegation exchange between Pakistan and Iran.

Source: The Nation Pakistan

30/ Israeli envoy emphasizes FTA with Korea

Israel has made it a priority to sign a free trade agreement (FTA) with Korea, says Israeli Ambassador to Korea Chaim Choshen.

During Israel’s 70th anniversary commemoration in Seoul last week, the ambassador also said his country is a world leader in research and development and more Korean companies, in addition to Samsung, LG and Hyundai Motor, are welcome to operate R&D projects there.

“Our first priority is that we will be able to conclude the negotiations on the FTA between Israel and Korea and sign it soon,” Choshen said during an anniversary ceremony at Grand Hyatt Seoul on May 2.

The two countries have been in FTA negotiations since June 2016.

The ambassador said signing a bilateral FTA is a “very important task” and it would increase the trade volume from $2.3 billion to “a much higher sum.”

He said a possible trade deal would also yield many other benefits to Israel and Korea.

Israel’s higher-learning institutions and research centers are ranked top in the world and the country has grown into a “startup nation” and a “powerhouse of technologies and technological knowhow,” according to Choshen.

Multinational companies Intel, Google, Microsoft, Samsung and LG run R&D projects in Israel.

“Recently Hyundai Motor identified Israel as an important world center for the car industry and signed a memorandum of understanding with the Technion, the MIT of Israel related to autonomous cars. I sure hope more Korean companies will follow,” Choshen said.

The ambassador stressed that several Israeli scientists have won the Nobel Prize, and Israel is one of a few countries that could launch satellites and is a world leader in advanced agriculture.

“We are always happy to share our knowhow with other countries and indeed, we do so,” he said.

He pointed out that Israel has been a destination for pilgrimage tours and that the number of Korean tourists would “grow in years to come.”

More than 40,000 tourists from Korea visited Israel in 2017, up 30 percent from a year ago.

“I would like to use this opportunity and inform you that the Israeli tourist office in Seoul is now operating again at full capacity,” the ambassador said.

The commemoration drew Korean and international dignitaries.

They included former Prime Minister Lee Hong-koo, Rep. Kang Ghil-boo of the Liberty Korea Party who heads the union of parliamentarians of the two countries, as well as ambassadors in Seoul, such as Fabien Penone of France, Otar Berdzenishvili of Georgia, Stephan Auer of Germany, Vikram Doraiswami of India, Della Seta of Italy, Peteris Vaivars of Latvia, Alexander Timonin of Russia, Nozuko Gloria Bam of South Africa and Wylbur Simuusa of Zambia.

Source: Korean Times

31/ Sri Lanka Thailand to begin talks on FTA from May

Sri Lanka and Thailand will begin talks on setting broad parameters for a free trade deal from May 2018, officials said.

The scheduled for May 16, the ‘scoping’ meeting set out the agenda and the areas covering the free trade deal.

Sri Lanka has expanded protectionism over the last decade or so, which kept the country’s production and exports below potential while growth was driven by government debt, which are now becoming increasingly difficult to service.

Sri Lanka also has restrictions on investment including the movement of people with new skills and business process which is keeping the country back, unlike East Asian nations.

Sri Lanka recently signed a FTA with Singapore which will allow the firms investing in Sri Lanka to bring a few executives with less difficulty.

Both Singapore and Korea have been top investors in Vietnam driving its exports.

Sri Lanka however is not planning an FTA with Korea at the moment, International Trade Minister Malik Samarawickreme said.

Source: Economy Next

 

32/ NAFTA talks reach make-or-break point

Chrystia Freeland arrives in Washington Monday for more high-level talks.

NAFTA negotiators are nearing the end of the runway.

Observers tracking the ups and downs of these intense trade talks say that if Canada, the United States and Mexico can’t get something on paper over the next few weeks, negotiations could easily drag on into 2019.

Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland arrives in Washington Monday for another round of meetings with her political counterparts — and she hasn’t booked a return ticket to Ottawa yet.

“We are really committed to doing whatever it takes to get a good win-win result,” she told reporters on Saturday, but was quick to add she would not ”pre-judge the outcome of the talks.”

Freeland’s schedule has been nearly upended by the demands of NAFTA; she’s been in D.C. almost every week since March. She even cancelled longstanding plans to travel to Brussels for NATO meetings last week, opting to stay at the negotiating table instead.

“We are coming up against some very significant deadlines,” said Flavio Volpe, president of the Automotive Parts Manufacturers’ Association.

Three deadlines worry the negotiators and their political masters.

The first is June 1. The Trump administration is threatening to hit Canada and Mexico with heavy tariffs on steel and aluminum unless it gets a renegotiated NAFTA agreement that it likes by that date.

The U.S. previously threatened to impose those tariffs by May 1, but at the last minute President Donald Trump granted both countries an extended exemption.

The second deadline is July 1, the day Mexican voters head to the polls for a federal election. As the campaign intensifies, so does the threat that it will force delays in the NAFTA process.

The fall midterm elections in the United States represent the third time factor that could delay talks and push negotiations into 2019.

​It’s not ideal for the Canadian economy if talks drag on for months longer, since uncertainty erodes investor confidence.

“Oh well, goodness, I think the biggest problem is with private investment,” said Pedro Antunes, deputy chief economist for the Conference Board of Canada.

“The uncertainty for businesses about whether they will have access to the North American market has played out a big role in holding back private investment intentions.”

Antunes said that if all three countries are able sign off soon on a preliminary NAFTA agreement-in-principle, it would send some positive signals to those jittery investors.

“An agreement-in-principle is simply an agreement to agree later on,” he said. “It doesn’t provide a whole lot of certainty. But I think what it will provide is some certainty that things won’t change for the next little while, and I hope that would be positive for investors.”

Sources have told CBC News that all three NAFTA countries are seeking an agreement-in-principle in the short term that would focus primarily on the auto sector.

For industry leaders like Volpe, that’s welcome news.

“We could see a broad sense of principles that could then be handed to staff and industry to hammer out exactly what that looks like down at the customs level,” Volpe said.

“I think there’s real will around the table … to get an agreement-in-principle.”

Any sort of preliminary deal would offer only a temporary respite for negotiators, according to a Canadian trade lawyer.

“There’s a long way between an agreement in principle and a final treaty that can be signed and presented to the legislatures of all three countries for ratification,” Lawrence Herman told CBC News.

“This is very complicated, much more complicated than I think anybody realized when they started.

“They’ve made a lot of progress, but once the outlines of an agreement are there, the technical elements have to be negotiated.”

Herman said it’s important to remember that when Canada and the European Union reached an agreement-in-principle on CETA (the Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement) in 2014, it took several years more before the deal was finalized and presented for ratification.

Source: CBC Canada

 

33/ Asean+3 finance, bank chiefs vow to resist protectionism

The finance ministers and central bank governors of Asean and three East Asian partner countries have vowed to push back against protectionist measures that they warned could derail world economic recovery.

“We… recognize the importance of resisting all forms of protectionism,” they said in a joint statement issued at the 21st Asean+3 Finance Ministers’ and Central Bank Governors’ Meeting in Manila.

Asean+3 refers to South-east Asia’s 10 economies, and China, Japan and South Korea.

The ministers and central bank governors reaffirmed their commitment to an “open and rules-based framework for multilateral trade and investment”.

They warned that protectionism and other risks from a faster-than-expected tightening in global financial conditions, as well as tensions arising from conflicts in places like the Korean peninsula “could induce large capital outflow and financial volatility in our region”.

The statement came on the same day that the United States and China agreed to continue negotiations to avert a trade conflict.

The Asean+3 Macroeconomic Research Office said on Thursday that protectionist measures which the US was lining up against China, the EU and its other major trading partners may dampen growth in Asia that is boosted by strong domestic demand, export growth and stable inflation.

Singapore’s Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat said earlier yesterday that festering trade rows, as well as new technologies and natural disasters, were among the key challenges confronting Asia as it seeks to sustain growth.

“Just as global value chains accelerate intra-regional trade and integration, they also magnify the transmission of external shocks,” he said. This becomes especially pertinent as the region faces headwinds from trade disputes.

Mr Heng added that new technologies, while offering opportunities, “also present challenges to our economies”.

Asean’s finance ministers and central bank governors have voiced concerns over attacks by hackers on the region’s financial systems.

Mr Heng said natural disasters, meanwhile, could undo years of economic gains if nothing is done to address the growing “protection gap” in financing to cover for losses due to catastrophes.

The United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific estimates that natural disasters led to over US$1 trillion in economic damage across East Asia from 1990 to 2016.

The finance ministers met yesterday to discuss setting up South-east Asia’s first “catastrophe risk pool” to narrow the “protection gap”.

The South-east Asia Disaster Risk Insurance Facility (Seadrif) is a step forward to bridging this gap, said Mr Heng. If something unfortunate happens, it will relieve the burden on governments because it can provide financing for losses to cover such an event, he added.

Seadrif taps the reinsurance industry for funding arrangements that can provide participating countries hit by natural disasters with rapid-response financing. Mr Heng said Singapore would contribute financial support to the pool, which should be in place next year.

Source: Business Inquirer

 

Ngày 08/5

34/ Members voice concerns over rising trade tensions, underline support for WTO

Forty-one members of the World Trade Organization issued a joint statement on 8 May expressing concerns over rising trade tensions and risks of escalating protectionism. The statement, delivered to a meeting of the WTO’s General Council, calls on governments to resolve their differences through dialogue and cooperation, including through the WTO.

The co-sponsors of the statement, which include both developed and developed country members, said a well-functioning, rules-based multilateral trading system embodied in the WTO was of “key importance for our economies as well as for global economic stability, prosperity and development”. They also noted the marked recovery in world trade last year and the WTO’s encouraging positive trade forecast for 2018 and 2019.

“However, we are concerned about increased trade tensions and related risks for the multilateral trading system and world trade,” the group said. “We encourage WTO Members to refrain from taking protectionist measures and to avoid risks of escalation. We call on Members to resolve their differences through dialogue and cooperation, including through WTO bodies and, as appropriate, recourse to WTO dispute settlement.”

The co-sponsors also called for action to address major challenges facing the WTO, including overcoming difficulties in concluding negotiations and divergent positions on trade and development.  They also highlighted the importance of filling all current and future vacancies on the Appellate Body without delay.

The co-sponsors of the statement are Argentina, Australia, Bangladesh, Benin, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Hong Kong China, Iceland, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Republic of Korea, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Liechtenstein, Malaysia, Mali, Mexico, Republic of Moldova, Myanmar, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Qatar, Singapore, Switzerland, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, Ukraine, Uruguay, and Viet Nam.

Source:wto.org

 

Ngày 14/5

35/ DDG Wolff: The WTO has a key role in promoting sustainable, productive agriculture

With digital technologies playing an increasingly important role in both food production and distribution, the WTO’s rule-based system provides ample space for policies to improve access to information and knowledge on farm trade, Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff said on 14 May. Speaking at the Global Forum on Agriculture in Paris, DDG Wolff also underlined the importance of ongoing collaborative efforts such as the Standards and Trade Development Facility in promoting the use of new technologies and digital tools to boost safe trade in food products.

Introduction

I’m delighted to join you today at the Global Forum on Agriculture and to contribute to the discussions on the issue of digital technologies and their role in the food value chain.

The world is changing at a fast pace and the potential benefits of technological advancement for agricultural production and trade demand our attention. It’s not surprising that at the WTO Members stay consistently engaged on two increasingly related subjects: agriculture and e-commerce.

The prospects for advancing work in these areas are promising. In our discussions since the Buenos Aires Ministerial Conference last year, WTO Members have clearly indicated that they are in favour of progress on these topics. WTO Discussions on MSMEs also show promise and digital technologies in agriculture offer hope for these smaller producers. Digital technologies make it easier for small producers to collect essential information, to make smart production decisions, and to connect to markets. WTO Members are excited about the potential positive impact that can be generated globally by working together on these topics.

The agriculture sector needs to feed 9 billion people by 2050 with limited natural resources and in a more sustainable way.  Technological progress has a key role to play in achieving this goal in general, and digital technologies in spreading relevant information, knowledge and good practices in particular.

In my talk today I have four main points that I would like to highlight about the way that the WTO contributes to ensuring that the global agriculture trading system is up to this challenge.

1. Inclusive trade:  The WTO framework contributes to ensuring that ICT benefits are broadly shared and to creating an inclusive trading system.
2. Transparency – WTO work collecting, synthesizing and integrating data from Members enhances transparency so that decision makers have the information they need.
3. Flexibility: Since Buenos Aires, WTO Members have been reflecting on approaches to sharing information, promoting dialogue and advancing discussions.
4. Collaborative solutions: Given the complexity of these issues, collaborative solutions are essential.

Digital technologies can support inclusive trade: The WTO framework contributes to ensuring that benefits from digitalization are broadly shared and to creating an inclusive trading system

New technologies can help reduce barriers to participation in the agricultural trading system, ensuring that its benefits are more broadly shared. These technologies have potentially transformative benefits for agricultural trade – including facilitating market integration and ensuring safe trade. The G20 has also recognized and championed the role of new technologies in agriculture as an effective way to enhance global food security and bridge income gaps. The WTO contributes to creating an enabling environment for the adoption and use of digital technologies in agriculture trading systems.

New technologies and innovations have transformed the management of sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) risks within food value chains.  The Standards and Trade Development Facility’s (STDF) global partnership brings together trade, health and agricultural experts to address SPS challenges and drive forward coherent solutions to boost safe trade, contributing to the UN’s agenda to 2030.  Many of these solutions draw on new technologies and digital tools.

Digital tools can increase the likelihood that risks along the value chain are detected. For instance, in the Asia-Pacific region, countries are benefiting from an STDF project to facilitate trade by strengthening information systems for pest surveillance and reporting.

Digital tools can decrease the need for unnecessary paperwork. Another STDF project is devoted to assessing the use of e-certification for trade in animals and animal products, identifying how veterinary authorities in developing countries can benefit. Transitioning to automated certification systems reduces the time spent on processing and transmitting data, leading to increased exports and private sector savings.

From smartphone-supported rapid diagnostic tests to pest trackers to electronic certification, digital tools help developing countries gain access to lucrative regional and international markets. The tools can contribute to sustainable economic growth, poverty reduction and an increased trust among trading partners.

This said, concerns remain about inequality across countries in terms of connectivity, access to information and new technologies and the skills to apply them. The positive impact that digital tools can have depends substantially on supportive public policies and taking concrete steps that make access to information and new technologies more equitable.

WTO rules on agriculture provide  policy space for governments to set up supportive policies and invest in research; training; extension and advisory services, including helping to make sure that information flows to producers and consumers.

More needs to be done of course to facilitate trade, notably by reducing traditional trade barriers to movements of goods and services, as well as removing trade distortions, so that they do not undermine the potential benefits from the adoption of digital technologies.

Transparency is essential for trust:  Digitalization of agriculture also provides new mechanisms for information sharing and transparency. WTO work — collecting, synthesizing and integrating data from Members — enhances transparency so that decision-makers have the information they need.

Agriculture has always been a data-intensive sector, but farmers – probably more than other stakeholders of the food value chain – were often unable to access data.  And once they did, they lacked the tools to synthesize and analyse it.

New technologies have played a crucial role in data democratisation.  Farmers can now have real time information on their mobile phones.  To inform their production and marketing decisions. Small-holder farmers in remote areas can download statistics on weather forecasts, crop conditions and pest prevalence. They can access information on prices, standards in export markets and financial services at every stage of the food value chain.

Furthermore, digital tools can play an important role in the reduction of asymmetries of information between different stakeholders in food value chains.  Enhanced communication between buyers and producers minimizes misunderstandings and increases trust.  Ultimately, the international trading system is strengthened through trust generated by these strengthened connections.

Both the OECD and WTO play a role in ensuring transparency of agriculture trade and policy. The OECD’s policy monitoring, including in the area of agriculture, highlights current policies and forecasts future implications of production and policy patterns. By shining a light on agriculture policies, the OECD provides countries with information and analysis and encourages collective focus on tackling market distortions.

Transparency is also enshrined in the WTO rules and processes. In agriculture, Members provide their trading partners with information on domestic support to agriculture, tariff-rate quota imports, and export competition policies.  This information is an essential input for future negotiations, supporting more informed debate and understanding.

At the WTO, new data systems are being put in place. Later this year, Members will be able to provide notification data directly to a system for on-line submission of notifications. This system will improve transparency by encouraging harmonized data submission and by ensuring accuracy through automated calculations. The database will provide a compilation of data from the full Membership, synthesizing information in a way that will enable deeper understanding of policies. Other systems are being developed and expanded in the Secretariat that will link databases, allowing search and analysis across the full range of trade policy information sources maintained at the WTO.

Rapid change requires Flexibile approaches: Since Buenos Aires, WTO Members have been reflecting on new flexible approaches to sharing information, promoting dialogue and advancing discussions.

There was a strong commitment to making progress on all the main agricultural trade issues – domestic support, market access and export competition.

In my view, shared increasingly by a number of WTO Members,  this offers us an opportunity of a fresh start. Members can now focus on the real barriers to agricultural trade and devise disciplines which can promote a fair and marketed-oriented system that can increase production to feed the world’s rising population and enhance countries’ food security.

The world economy is changing rapidly. Technology offers potential solutions to what used to be considered to be intractable problems in agriculture. This impressive pace of change requires fresh, flexible approaches — approaches that promote understanding, rather than exacerbate differences.

The new chair of the agriculture negotiations at the WTO, Ambassador Ford from Guyana, has embraced the challenge with enthusiasm. He is well qualified to lead these technical discussions – with a Ph.D. in agriculture economics and many years working at the FAO as an economist.  He understands agriculture and the essential role agriculture trade plays in the world economy. He is eager to explore new flexible approaches for Members to share and discuss information — to create the necessary fertile ground for dialogue and debate.

A critical mass of WTO Members believes that there is also room for improving other areas of WTO rules in a way that enhances world economic growth and increases standards of living in all countries. In these areas, digital technologies play a crucial role.

• During the last Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires, some 71 countries, accounting for 3/4 of global GDP,  agreed to seek common ground on rules relating to electronic commerce.
• More than 80 countries decided to address the needs of micro and medium and small enterprises (MSMEs) to foster improved participation in regional and global markets. Here again, I would  stress that enhanced access to timely and reliable information is among MSMEs’ most pressing needs.

Within these initiatives, countries have already started exploring the likelihood of achieving reforms that would strengthen global trade policy making and support the multilateral trading system.

Collaborative solutions: Given the complexity of these issues, collaborative solutions are essential

Technological change; Agricultural development; Environmental uncertainty. These issues affect each other in complex ways. In order to achieve sustainable solutions to pressing challenges, we need to continue to work together – at the individual level, at the country level and at the multilateral level. Organizations can collaborate to bring together diverse viewpoints in order to identify future opportunities and risks.

I’ve already mentioned one example of effective collaboration – the STDF.

The STDF is a partnership among the FAO, OIE, WHO, WTO and World Bank Group, Codex and IPPC Secretariats, bilateral donors, experts from developing countries, other international/regional organizations playing a role in SPS capacity building, and the private sector. Building on the diverse knowledge from these organizations, the STDF identifies good practice and leverages resources to help developing countries meet international standards, which in turn assists them in participating in global value chains. STDF projects support farmers, processors, traders and governments worldwide. Most projects involve a public private partnership approach.

The Agricultural Marketing Information System (AMIS) is another example of successful collaboration. AMIS is an inter-agency platform established to enhance food market transparency and policy response for food security. Bringing together the principal trading countries of agricultural commodities, AMIS assesses global food supplies, focusing on wheat, maize, rice and soybeans, and provides a platform to coordinate policy action in times of market uncertainty. By enhancing transparency and policy coordination in international food markets, AMIS has helped to prevent unexpected price hikes and strengthen global food security.

Collaboration is difficult and time-consuming.  It can be costly. It takes patience and a willingness to see issues from different perspectives. But only through meaningful efforts to engage with others will we get answers to the questions that will help us identify solutions to pressing challenges.

Concluding remarks

With the world population increasing, there is need to have innovative agricultural systems to ensure adequate food production for all countries and promote their food security.

The important role of international trade in agricultural products cannot be overemphasised. The rules-based multilateral trading system has contributed significantly to improving access to high quality food for deficit producing countries and in the process enhancing the living standards of many people around the world.

Digital technologies play an increasingly crucial role both in food production, and in helping the food flow from where it is produced to where it is needed.  Contemporary food value chains are increasingly data driven.  The WTO rules provide ample space for supportive policies and for the much needed investments to improve access to information and knowledge for all.  This policy space combined with new potential trade rules would significantly contribute to enhancing food security, food safety and sustainable production.

I am convinced that by engaging in pragmatic, specific, thoughtful discussions, like we are having here today, we can help develop the way forward for  increased cooperation within an international rules-based system. We can imagine, and then create, new pathways for sustainable agricultural policy reform and inclusive economic growth.

Thank you.

Source:wto.org

 

Ngày 15/5

36/ Applications open for WTO workshop on trade and public health

The WTO, in close collaboration with the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), is holding its annual Workshop on Trade and Public Health, in Geneva from 8 to 12 October 2018. The deadline to submit applications is 8 June 2018.

The workshop takes a holistic approach to the interlinkages between trade and public health, building on similar workshops held since 2014, as well as on earlier activities on intellectual property and public health organized by the WTO Secretariat since 2005. The event will follow the approach of the WHO-WIPO-WTO Trilateral Study on “Promoting Access to Medical Technologies and Innovation: Intersections Between Public health, Intellectual Property and Trade”.

What is the workshop about?

The workshop’s main objective is to build the capacity of national policy makers to analyse policy choices at the crossroads of trade, intellectual property and public health. It will review multilateral trade agreements as part of the wider action to address needs specific to public health, and will place them in the context of the broader factors that impact on innovation and access to medical technologies.

The themes of this year’s programme include: public health determinants; the intellectual property system, including special compulsory licences for export; public procurement policies and practices; competition policy and rules; market access determinants; health services; health-related provisions in regional trade agreements; regulatory issues, including approval, quality, control and effectiveness of medicines and the protection of clinical trial data; as well as health-related measures in the framework of the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee and the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) Committee. The programme is complemented by breakout sessions on topical issues, such as anti-microbial resistance and non-communicable diseases. Exercises and case studies will set these issues in a practical context.

Who should apply?

The workshop is tailored for senior government officials with direct responsibility for matters related to the interaction between trade, intellectual property and public health and who are expected to continue working or being assigned further responsibilities in this field.

Candidates should already have established expertise and experience in their field of work, a good level of knowledge of the WTO agreements and public health policy and all-round proficiency in English, the working language of the workshop. They may come from authorities responsible for trade, intellectual property, public health, foreign affairs or any other relevant authority in the areas of interface between trade agreements and public health.

How to apply?

WTO members and observers eligible to benefit from WTO training activities are invited to nominate capital-based officials by 8 June 2018. Detailed information regarding the application procedures is available here.

The WTO Secretariat can fund a maximum of 30 participants from developing countries and least developed countries. Provision will also be made for up to five self-funded participants.

Source:wto.org

 

37/ Members show sustained engagement in Belarus accession process

At the 10th meeting of the Working Party on the Accession of Belarus held on 15 May, WTO members stressed their commitment to working towards the country’s WTO accession and urged Minsk to take appropriate policy decisions in order to make a decisive push forward. The meeting was the third since the resumption of the Working Party work in January 2017.

“We seem to have found a good rhythm and I would like to thank everyone for their sustained engagement in the process,” said Ambassador Kemal Madenoğlu (Turkey), Chair of the Working Party. “Over the past 18 months the factual picture has become much clearer. Attention is shifting to the elaboration of commitment language for the Working Party Report. This is an important step forward. It is at this stage, as the negotiators seek to define the parameters of the negotiation outcomes, that key policy choices will need to be made. High-level political engagement will, therefore, become central to the process. I hope that the authorities in Minsk will rise to this challenge,” he added.

H.E. Mr Andrei Yeudachenka, First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Belarus, led a 35-person delegation in Geneva which included deputy ministers of the Ministries of Economy, Finance, Anti-monopoly Regulation and Trade, and Forestry, as well as high-level officials of various government agencies and the chief negotiator for the WTO accession of Belarus, Ambassador Vladimir Serpikov. “The presence of this impressive team sends a strong signal about the importance that the Government of Belarus continues to attach to WTO accession,” the Chair said.

Mr Yeudachenka noted that this 10th meeting of the Working Party was “an excellent opportunity to take stock of our progress and to discuss the next steps with the view to advance Belarus’ accession. We believe that our accession is getting closer to the final stage and call on WTO members to step over the format of questions and replies and to move to more concrete work on draft commitments language,” he said.

Mr Yeudachenka thanked the WTO Secretariat for the revised draft Working Party Report circulated among members on 8 March. The draft report, he went on, “reflects the hard work and distinctive steps made by Belarus towards the modification of its foreign trade regime. The draft commitments cover almost all sections of the draft report. These commitments show the willingness of Belarus to fully conform to the WTO rules.”

Belarus also reported on its application to be granted observer status to the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement.

On the bilateral front, Belarus informed members that it has concluded 17 bilateral market access agreements, four of them since the last meeting of the Working Party in September 2017. A number of bilateral negotiations are ongoing and several members were to meet with the delegation of Belarus during its stay in Geneva.

On the legislative front, the Chair stressed that the enactment of WTO-related legislation and the implementation of enforcement mechanisms is an essential part of the accession process and invited the Minsk authorities to “regularly update its Legislative Action Plan, to brief members on legislative developments, and to submit copies of relevant Belarusian and Eurasian Economic Union legislation, including drafts.”

While recognizing that progress has been made by Belarus over the past months, some members asked Belarus for further clarification on a wide range of issues, including its investment regime, state ownership, state trading and privatization, pricing and competition policies, import and export regulations, customs valuation, technical barriers to trade, sanitary and phytosanitary measures, and intellectual property rights.

Ambassador Madenoğlu said that the discussions on these areas “have helped the Working Party identify remaining factual gaps and areas of the text which will require further detailed work,” and called on members to submit in writing comments, questions and drafting suggestions to the WTO Secretariat by 13 June.

The Chair said the timing of the next meeting will depend on the availability of the required inputs and on progress on the market access front. “A specific date will emerge in consultation with delegations and the Secretariat once the new inputs are circulated,” he said.

Background

Previous Working Party meeting: 13 September 2017 (9th meeting)
Working Party Chair: Ambassador Kemal Madenoğlu (Turkey)
Application first received: 23 September 1993
Working Party established: 27 October 1993

Source:wto.org

 

Ngày 16/5

38/ Korea initiates WTO dispute complaints against US safeguard duties on washers, solar cells

Korea has requested WTO dispute consultations with the United States regarding US safeguard duties imposed on imports of large residential washers and crystalline silicon photovoltaic products. The requests were circulated to WTO members on 16 May.

Korea claims the measures are inconsistent with a number of provisions under the WTO’s Agreement on Safeguards and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994.

Further information is available in document WT/DS545/1 and WT/DS546/1

What is a request for consultations?

The request for consultations formally initiates a dispute in the WTO. Consultations give the parties an opportunity to discuss the matter and to find a satisfactory solution without proceeding further with litigation. After 60 days, if consultations have failed to resolve the dispute, the complainant may request adjudication by a panel.

Source:wto.org

 

Ngày 17/5

39/ DDG Wolff: Regional agreements must contribute to advancing multilateral trade

It is vitally important to ensure that bilateral and regional integration arrangements do not fall outside of the global system, but contribute to its advancement, said Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff in an address to the Astana Economic Forum in Kazakhstan on 17 May. Here is what he said:

Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,

I would like to thank the Government of Kazakhstan for the invitation to participate in this Forum and for the opportunity to address this distinguished audience today.  I would also like to thank Mme. Tatyana Valovaya and the Eurasian Economic Commission for hosting this session.

Our topic today, “Regional Megablocks. Is it the Way to Fragmentation or New Globalization“, is well-attuned to the broader global debate.

After years of sluggish growth, trade expansion has been picking up around the world. It is growing at a sustained pace that we have not seen since the global financial crisis. The WTO anticipates merchandise trade volume growth of 4.4% in 2018, as measured by the average of exports and imports, roughly matching the 4.7% increase recorded for 2017.

However, there are many risks to this more positive outlook. And these risks are continuing to grow. In recent months, we have seen the spectre of protectionism rising again. The risk of escalation of trade barriers across the globe is clear.

This is one of the most urgent challenges before us today.  It connects with our conversation here about “fragmentation and new globalisation” in two key ways.

First, WTO Members need to work together to step back from the brink. Instead of escalating threats of trade barriers that would only result in reduced global economic growth, WTO Members need to find ways to resolve their issues constructively.  Preserving the spirit of international cooperation, and not confrontation, is vitally important today.  It is this spirit of international cooperation which has guided the creation of the multilateral trading system in the post-war period.

Second, we need to make sure that the emergence of new challenges to global trade does not detract from the efforts currently under way in Geneva — in fact it is quite the reverse. They are more imperative now than ever before –

• to address outstanding market access barriers and trade-distorting practices in agriculture, industrial goods and services;
• to redress current imbalances in the rights and obligations of countries participating in world trade; and
• to create new rules suited to the realities of world trade today.

Taking these steps will pave the way for reducing remaining barriers and opening up new markets and opportunities.

Now – more than ever – we need to strengthen the multilateral trading system.

The multilateral trading system – represented by the GATT and the WTO – has been a success story. It has fostered greater cooperation among nations for 70 years, facilitating significant advances in economic well-being around the world, supporting job creation, prosperity and development, and has helped to lift millions of people out of poverty.

The WTO provides a forum for negotiations aimed at reducing obstacles to international trade and ensuring a level playing field.  Regional integration should strive to achieve the same goals.

Today we see the rise of new-generation integration agreements – so called mega-regionals – that go beyond increasing trade links. They foresee deeper integration partnerships, with the goal of removal of trade barriers as well as alignment of regulations and standards governing goods, services, investment and public procurement markets.

This can be a positive development when these agreements promote trade creation that exceeds what they deliver in trade diversion.  Each should be crafted to be a building block contributing to a stronger multilateral trading system.  The end goal must be to create a world trading system that maximizes benefits for the interests of all, while improving the economies of the signatories to each regional arrangement.

Bilateral and regional arrangements pose risks as well as benefits. They must not divide the multilateral trading system into mega-regional units, making the sum of the parts less than the whole.

It is clear that bilateral and regional agreements are proceeding apace, whether or not they measure up to the standard set by the WTO.   The degree to which they contribute to the multilateral trading system depends on their coherence and direction. It is crucial that the stakeholders, while following internal policy objectives in pursuit of their own narrow commercial interests, keep in mind the bigger picture and promote common pillars of trade and investment liberalization consistent with the efforts of other regional groups and promoting a wider common interest in achieving an improved multilateral trading system.

In these times when trading arrangements are being tested, all must demonstrate that the multilateral trading system is robust.  One of the ways to do it is to adopt new multilateral reforms.

In 2013 the WTO delivered the Trade Facilitation Agreement. It was the first major multilateral deal in the organization’s history.  This agreement has huge economic significance. Full implementation could reduce trade costs globally by an average of 14.3 per cent. This would have a larger impact than the elimination of all remaining tariffs in the world today.

Then, two years after that breakthrough, the WTO delivered a major agriculture reform with the decision to abolish agricultural export subsidies.

In addition to that, a large group of Members, accounting for the 90% of world trade in IT products, agreed on the expansion of the WTO’s Information Technology Agreement. This updated agreement eliminates tariffs on a range of new generation IT products, trade in which is worth around 1.3 trillion dollars per year.

And these agreements did not just stay on paper but turned into reality.  Last year the Trade Facilitation Agreement and the TRIPS amendment, which eases the access of essential medicines for the poorest countries, entered into force.

Besides their economic significance, these breakthroughs achieved more than the sum of their parts. They showed that the 164 WTO Members could work together in a meaningful way to solve the most complex problems they face.

As important, at the Eleventh Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires at the end of 2017 – there was a resurgence of dynamism. Many Members launched a number of open-ended initiatives in some other areas of work such as e-commerce, investment facilitation and Micro and Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (MSMEs). And it is very interesting to look at the make-up of these new groups. They do not represent a north-south divide. Instead, they encompass developed, developing and least-developed countries, big and small.

It is very encouraging that each of these initiatives is being conducted in an open, transparent and inclusive manner, with non-signatories of the original declarations being invited to participate in the meetings if they so wish.

In addition, an important demonstration of multilateralism is to be found in new accessions to the WTO. Thirty-six governments have acceded to the organisations since its foundation in 1995, signalling to the world their desire to have predictable, transparent and non-discriminatory trade regimes. Kazakhstan, which joined the WTO in 2015, was already a member-state of the Eurasian Economic Union.  Belarus, another EAEU member-state, will, it is hoped, complete its accession to the WTO in the very near future.

As of now there are 22 on-going accessions in process, many of which are on the advanced stage. Expansion of the WTO Membership is another indication of the importance of the multilateral trading system and a common commitment to its further strengthening.

All trading countries need to maintain forward momentum, to strengthen and improve the world trading system so it can deliver even more growth, development and inclusivity.  In this context, it is vitally important to ensure that bilateral and regional integration arrangements do not fall outside of the global system, but contribute to its advancement.

Thank you.

Source:wto.org

 

40/ WTO members complete first cluster of meetings for fisheries subsidies negotiations since MC11

WTO members in the Negotiating Group on Rules on 14-17 May held their first substantive cluster of meetings on fisheries subsidies since the 11th Ministerial Conference (MC11) in line with their programme of work planned for May to July. Members exchanged views and information on support for capital and operating costs of fishing, and related policies, in the context of ongoing work on disciplining subsidies that enhance or maintain fishing capacity or contribute to overcapacity and overfishing. Members also continued the work begun in 2017 to streamline negotiating texts in preparation for a return to text-based negotiations.

As outlined in the agreed work programme, the four-day cluster of meetings started with a technical session where members presented information on their respective fisheries support programs. Members also held a thematic discussion focused on issues related to establishing disciplines on subsidies that enhance and/or maintain fishing capacity and subsidies that contribute to overcapacity and overfishing. Special and differential treatment for developing members and least developed country (LDC) members as it relates to these issues also was taken up. In addition, time was allotted during the cluster for bilateral meetings among members.

Members on the last day worked on streamlining various proposals related to the scope of proposed disciplines, including types of measures and of subsidized activities that would be covered by disciplines, geographical aspects, and certain measures proposed for exclusion. The latest version of the document containing the texts that have been streamlined, including those prepared in the run up to the 11th Ministerial Conference (MC11) held last December in Buenos Aires.

The chair of the Negotiating Group, Ambassador Roberto Zapata Barradas (Mexico), closing the meeting, said: “I believe that discussions have been productive, both in increasing the understanding of some issues and in identifying areas where further clarification continues to be needed, as well as in advancing our ongoing streamlining work.”

In accordance with the work programme, the next cluster of meetings will be on 11-14 June, to discuss issues related to subsidies to fishing of overfished stocks, along with streamlining of text on definitions.

The work programme provides for multi-day meeting clusters, each organized around a theme, in May, June and July.

In the MC11 Ministerial Decision on Fisheries Subsidies, members agreed to continue to engage constructively in fisheries subsidies negotiations with a view to adopting an agreement by the next Ministerial Conference in 2019 on comprehensive and effective disciplines that prohibit certain forms of fisheries subsidies that contribute to overcapacity and overfishing, and eliminate subsidies that contribute to illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing. Members also recognized that appropriate and effective special and differential treatment for developing country members and least developed country members should be an integral part of these negotiations.

Source:wto.org

 

Ngày 18/5

41/ DDG Wolff: WTO accession has served as a key engine for economic transformation

Excellency, Ladies and Gentlemen,

I would like to thank the Government of Kazakhstan for the invitation to participate in this Forum and for the opportunity to address this distinguished audience today.

Against the backdrop of growing tensions, uncertainties and unpredictability surrounding the global economy today, the Astana Economic Forum this year is providing a timely and much needed opportunity to discuss how the global community can work together to meet the challenges of the 21st century.  During these two days, we have the chance to hear from renowned specialists, coming from a range of disciplines.  Face-to-face discussions and direct engagement among senior policy makers can contribute in making the world a better, more inclusive, and hopefully, safer place.

I have devoted my career to international trade, having first served as government official in a number of US administrations, then as a private lawyer specialising in international trade, and now as Deputy Director General of the World Trade Organization.  Today, 164 Members of the WTO, like many other multilateral institutions, are confronted by multiple challenges, ranging from the threat of protectionism and unilateralism, the risk of a trade war, to the inability to forge consensus on core issues, some of which have underpinned the world trading system for decades since the end of the World War II.  But, this challenging time also provides opportunities, of great benefit to the world trading system if we can act together and decisively to seize them.

This morning, I have been asked by the organisers to give remarks on the following topic: “Does the WTO remain a key engine for a country’s transformation and integration into the global economy?”  Frankly, among all the different parts of the world that the Organization is dealing with, I cannot think of a better place than Kazakhstan, the heart of Central Asia, to discuss this topic.

Let me start with a brief background. The WTO and the GATT before it are primarily about transformation of acceding Member economies and their integration into the world economy. In 1947, the General Agreement on Trade and Tariff started out with 23-member countries called at that time Contracting Parties.  The GATT was one of the key pillars of the global economic governance, together with the IMF and the World Bank, they were tasked with smooth flows of goods between countries to ensure post-war economic recovery.  The effort was a great success, as trade was one of the main drivers of the unpreceded levels of economic growth in human history, associated with increased prosperity, improvements of people’s lives, the spread of welfare and technology across the globe.

By the time Contracting Parties decided to transform the GATT into the WTO in 1994, 128 countries, it was also trade that played a large part in shaping the economies of most of the world’s countries.  The WTO, now equipped with a broader set of international trade rules covering goods, services and intellectual property, has had profound impact on newly independent states emerged from the Soviet Union, and other formerly central planned economies, such as China, Laos and Vietnam, that have used their accessions to the WTO as a vehicle to shift toward market-based economies.

WTO accessions also have impact on all other members’ economies – big and small, rich and poor – from Saudi Arabia to least developed countries and island economies from the Atlantic, the Indian Ocean to the South Pacific (i.e. Cabo Verde, Seychelles, Samoa, Tonga and Vanuatu) Oceans, to serve as an instrument for structural reforms and economic diversification.

Since the establishment of the WTO in 1995, a total of 36 economies joined the WTO.  And WTO accession has served as a key engine for their economic transformation and a key driver for their integration into the global economy.

WTO membership is unlike any other membership of multilateral institutions.  By acceding to the WTO, governments and their behaviours are pledging themselves to abide by the Organization’s core values of openness, transparency, good governance and the rule of law.  Therefore, accession negotiations are a tough and often long process, as involve economy-wide reforms.  But they deliver.

This is an entirely voluntary effort, although also an intense series of negotiations.  A country wishing to foster its own interests.  It is not compelled to do so.  The WTO will do everything it can to assist in the process.

There is no better place to demonstrate the dividends of a long and hard WTO accession process than in Kazakhstan. It was a long journey of nearly 20 years for Kazakhstan to join the Organization in 2015.  But, it has helped transform Kazakhstan from a poor country with GDP per capita at USD 1,350 in 1996 to a modern economy, with sophisticated management based on knowledge and skills, with GDP per capita peaking at nearly USD 14,000 in 2013.

Another difficult accession process as that of China, because of its size, and the complexity of the modifying tens of thousands of laws and regulations to qualify for WTO membership is.  Through a 15-year accession process, China did integrate substantially into the world trading system.  That integration was and is a test of the world trading system due to the degree of transformation required and the dramatic growth of China as a strong participant in world commerce.

Research shows that countries undertaking the reforms required to join the WTO tend to grow at around 2.5 percentage points faster than others once the process is completed.  And on average, those countries have grown 20% faster than the overall world average for the last twenty years.

Today, WTO membership has reached 164, with its rules covering over 98% of world trade.  But 22 accessions are still in the pipeline.  In this region, these include Uzbekistan which started the accession process in 1994, and Turkmenistan which Azerbaijan has been in this process since 1997 and Iran since 2005.  I trust that Kazakhstan’s positive experience can serve as a model and encouragement for others to make necessary but tough reform decisions.

This brings me to my second thought on the WTO as an engine for transformation and global integration: even after gaining membership, a country within the context of new WTO agreements continues engaging in trade reforms.  In recent years, the WTO has shown that the multilateral trading system can produce a new set of rules which support and deepen its members’ trade reforms.

In 2013, WTO members delivered on the Trade Facilitation Agreement.  This agreement has huge economic significance, potentially cutting trade costs globally by an average of 14.3 per cent. This is a bigger impact than the elimination of all remaining tariffs in the world today.

Then, two years after that breakthrough, Members delivered the WTO’s biggest ever agriculture reform, with the decision to abolish agricultural export subsidies.  In addition to that, a large group of members, accounting for the 90% of world trade in IT products, agreed on the expansion of the WTO’s Information Technology Agreement. This deal eliminates tariffs on a range of new generation IT products, trade in which is worth around 1.3 trillion dollars per year.  Afghanistan and Kazakhstan are members, and they joined for their own economic benefit, for their boost to their own economies.

And these deals did not just stay on paper but turned into reality.  Last year, the Trade Facilitation Agreement and the TRIPS amendment, which eases the access of essential medicines for the poorest countries, entered into force, following the ratification of these new rules by over two-thirds of membership.

More recently, at the Eleventh Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires at the end of 2017, there was a resurgence of dynamism.  In addition to the commitment to secure a deal on fishery subsidies that will deliver on the Sustainable Development Goals 14.6 by the end of 2019, a large group of members agreed to launch discussions that could eventually lead to new global trade rules in e-commerce, investment facilitation and micro, small and medium enterprises.

This is to say that the WTO is a dynamic organization that is ready to respond to the evolving needs of its members to modernise and transform their economies, by updating global trade rules that promote greater integration into the global economy.  I am happy to note that Kazakhstan is part of the “modernizers” and her voice is important to advance these conversations in the coming months and years.

I heard that there is a saying in Kazakh, which translates roughly as “where there is togetherness, there is a progress”.  I believe that the WTO remains a forum that brings together all players to pave the way forward to the development of the global trading system assisting in ongoing transformations of domestic economies for their own benefit and to continue to improve the net benefits for all.

The WTO is not a cure all.  There will still be difficulties between members, and the WTO does not address all questions.  It does not rule out corruption for most trade, for example, but perhaps one day it will attack this sort of problem, as it has making it easier for trade to cross borders through the capacity building and commitments of the Trade Facilitation Agreement, and as it is seeking to do with respect to E-Commerce, Services and Investment,

None of the newly acceding countries take the WTO for granted.  It is imperative that the all members demonstrate their continued commitments as well.  As one trade minister of a major trading country said “If the WTO did not exist, it would have to be created.”

Thank you.

Source:wto.org

 

42/ 4 challenges NAFTA negotiations are facing as deadline looms

U.S. President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau chatted over the phone this week, discussing whether the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) negotiations could be wrapped up in the coming days.

But on Tuesday, Mexico’s economy minister said he doubts a deal will actually go through in time for Thursday.

“It is not easy. We don’t believe we’ll have it by Thursday,” Ildefonoso Guajardo said.

Those are troubling words, as the U.S. Congress has said May 17 is the latest possible date to get a deal in order to have time to vote on it this year.

The countries have also been meeting frequently in an effort to get an agreement before national elections in Mexico.

Here are the biggest challenges Canada, U.S. and Mexico are facing: 

1. Shortage of time

Nathan Janzen, a senior economist at RBC, explained that time is one of the biggest challenges now facing the talks.

“We’re starting to run out of time,” he told Global News.

“Trade negotiations are complicated and it’s tough to rush them. That’s what they’re bumping up against now.”

And even if a NAFTA deal goes through in the coming days, it will be very bare bones — meaning the details will need to be decided over several more meetings.

“What they’re talking about signing even right now is to get a preliminary agreement in place. I think that’s essentially an agreement to agree. So basically, they’re trying to make enough progress that they can be pretty confident they’re going to be able to make a deal in the long run.”

2. Auto sector

Janzen explained that there has been movement on issues related to the auto industry, but many factors are still up in the air.

Any potential agreement hinges on the ability of Mexico and the U.S. to bridge a key ideological gap: in an effort to steer manufacturing north, the U.S.’s latest demand is that 40 per cent of every car be produced in high-wage jurisdictions, with some credit for spending on research.

“That’s pretty obviously taking a jab at the Mexican auto industry, where the wages are a lot lower than Canada and the U.S.,” Janzen noted.

3. Sunset clause

Talks still face the hurdle of U.S. demands for a sunset clause, which allows NAFTA to expire if it is not renegotiated every five years.

Canada has maintained that it does not want one.

Janzen says a sunset clause would not only cause a lot of work for officials every five years, it would also maintain a sense of uncertainty within industries that rely on the trade deal.

“That just means every five years, you will have to go through another politically-charged renegotiation of NAFTA,” he said. “It’s very hard for industries to invest in integration if they don’t know whether the deal is going to be there in five years.”

Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland has said that NAFTA already includes a provision that allows countries to leave, making such a clause unnecessary.

4. Unaddressed issues

Some issues have barely been discussed, or have been only touched on by officials.

Pharmaceuticals is one example. Last week, the U.S. signalled its desire to use trade deals to change the way drug prices are set abroad, in an effort to have other countries shoulder more of the costs of pharma research.

The U.S. has specifically complained about Canadian pricing policies. But it’s unclear exactly how that issue will play out.

There’s also dairy, which U.S. Congressional leader Paul Ryan recently said was an issue relatively untouched in NAFTA talks so far.

What’s next in the negotiations?

While NAFTA being completely shut down by the U.S. seemed to be a real possibility earlier this year, Janzen says that now chances are the trade agreement will live on.

“We’ve seen the U.S. backing away from some of the more extreme positions they were talking even earlier this year,” he said.

But he explains that there is still a lot more work to be done, and delays with the U.S. midterm and Mexico elections are likely, so the talks will stretch into 2019.

Hanging over the talks, there are also the steel and aluminum tariffs that Trump has spared Mexico and Canada from so far.

If talks freeze up, or Trump grows frustrated, there is a possibility that Canada’s exemption from steel and aluminum tariffs may be eliminated.

Source: Global News Canada

43/ CPTPP benefits Vietnam’s industrial property

Vietnam’s industrial real estate sector stands ready to take off after the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) comes into effect, experts have said.

France’s FM Logistic, a leading group in international supply of warehouse, transport, and packaging, has been successful in renting and purchasing land in the northern region with the advice from real estate services company Cushman & Wakefield.

As part of the firm “Ambition 2022” plan to expand geographical coverage to support customer growth, FM Logistic launched a 5,000 square-metre tri-temperature logistics warehouse in Bac Ninh province while purchasing an additional 50,000 square metres in the northern region to build the first European-standard storage in Vietnam.

According to Director of Operations in Asia for FM Logistic Stéphane Descarpentries, FM Logistic is striving to become one of the leading logistics providers in Vietnam by 2020.

While holding that Vietnam’s logistics sector is enjoying thriving development, with vast expansions of leased space by many famous names in the world, Managing Director of Cushman & Wakefield Vietnam Alex Crane, said that it’s fantastic time for the industrial and logistics businesses.

Meanwhile, Stephen Wyatt, Country Head for Jones Lang LaSalle (JLL) Vietnam, believed that Vietnam is grasping the attention of foreign investors with 80 percent of the investments poured into the industrial and manufacturing sectors.

Many investors are shifting their capital from China to Vietnam as Vietnam has sound planning for industrial parks and the Government is considering the establishment of specialised economic zones which offer preferential taxes for corporations, he stressed.

According to the JLL’s latest report, more than 18,000 hectares of industrial land in the north will be put into use by the end of 2020.

Currently, Hai Phong city and Bac Ninh province are the two localities that have the highest number of industrial parks in the country. They are also the largest attractors of industrial investment in the northern key economic region.

Meanwhile, the central region is expected to be an emerging playground that will attract a large pool of investors in 2018.

Strong growth of manufacturing and consumption will spur the surge of demands for warehouses in the country, according to the CBRE Vietnam. Warehouse rental fees are said to rise 1.5 percent to 4 percent per year in the coming time.

Good transport infrastructure also makes the southern localities like Ho Chi Minh City, and Binh Duong, Long An and Dong Nai provinces, become a magnet for foreign investors. Land rental fees at the southern industrial parks have picked up 3 percent from the same time last year.

Vietnamese depot market will be thriving thanks to the expanded operation of e-commerce giants like Alibaba, JD.com and Tencent together with strong growth of convenience stores and retail models developed by such large firms as Lotte and Aeon.

Source: Vietnam Plus

 

44/ S. Korea, Mercosur to launch FTA negotiations in late May

South Korea and the Southern Common Market, also known as Mercosur, will begin negotiations on a trade pact this month.

An official at Seoul’s Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy unveiled the plan on Wednesday, saying the government will actively push for new free trade deals to expand its trade relations with emerging markets.

Consisting of Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay, Mercosur is a regional economic bloc established in 1991. It accounts for 70 percent of South America’s population and has a gross domestic product(GDP) of two-point-seven trillion U.S. dollars, equivalent to 76 percent of the continent’s total GDP.

The official said Seoul will also launch negotiations this year with the Pacific Alliance, another Latin American free-trade bloc consisting of Mexico, Chile, Peru and Colombia, in a bid to join as an associate member.

Source: KBS

45/ NAFTA nations ‘nowhere near’ a deal: USTR Lighthizer

The top U.S. trade official on Thursday poured cold water on the prospect of an imminent breakthrough in talks to rework the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) hours after Canada’s prime minister struck a positive note.

“The NAFTA countries are nowhere near close to a deal,” U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer said in a statement, pointing to “gaping differences” on a host of issues, including intellectual property, agricultural access, labor and energy.

Lighthizer said he would continue to work toward “the best possible deal for American farmers, ranchers, workers, and businesses.”

The future of trade talks between the United States, Mexico and Canada was in limbo as a Thursday deadline passed to present U.S. lawmakers with a revamped NAFTA after a push to conclude a deal in the past few weeks.

There was no immediate reaction to Lighthizer’s comments from the offices of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland.

U.S. officials say the negotiations need to wrap up very soon to give the current Congress time to vote on a final text.

Earlier on Thursday, Trudeau said he felt “positive” about talks to rework NAFTA, while a top Mexican official noted a deal might be possible by the end of May.

“To be honest, we are down to a point where there is a good deal on the table,” Trudeau told the Economic Club of New York. “It’s right down to the last conversations. … I’m feeling positive about this, but it won’t be done until it’s done.”

Freeland traveled to Washington on Thursday for internal meetings with labor officials and representatives from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a spokesman for her said.

A Mexican technical negotiating team is in Washington, but there is no date set for the next NAFTA ministerial meeting with the United States and Canada.

Mexico’s economy minister, Ildefonso Guajardo, said a deal could be reached by the end of May, but added that if no agreement is reached the talks could extend beyond the July 1 Mexican presidential election.

For that to happen, though, the United States and Mexico would have to end what officials say is deadlock over U.S. demands to raise wages in the auto sector and boost the North American content of cars made in the three NAFTA nations.

Critics complain the move is a clear swipe at Mexico, which U.S. President Donald Trump says added low-wage manufacturing jobs at Americans’ expense after NAFTA was signed in 1994.

“Any renegotiated NAFTA that implies losses of existing Mexican jobs is unacceptable,” Guajardo said in a tweet.

Under the Trade Promotion Authority statute that would allow a simple yes or no vote on NAFTA, Trump must notify Congress 90 days before he can sign the agreement. The U.S. International Trade Commission then has up to 105 days after the signing to produce a study on the effects of the agreement.

U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Paul Ryan has said that the Republican-controlled Congress would need to be notified of a new deal by Thursday to give lawmakers a chance to approve it before a newly elected Congress takes over in January.

Ryan, asked on Thursday whether there was any wiggle room in the NAFTA approval timeline for Congress, said, “The wiggle room would be at the ITC.”

“My guess,” he added, “is there is probably some wiggle room at the ITC for what it takes for their part of the process but not an indefinite amount and that means time is really of the essence.”

Source: Reuters

 

Ngày 21/5

46/ DG Azevêdo in Fiji: ‘WTO vital to help Pacific region respond to its unique challenges and opportunities’

In a speech at the University of the South Pacific (USP) in Suva, Fiji, on 21 May 2018, Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said that trade and trade policy had a crucial role to play in supporting Fiji and other Pacific Islands to meet the big challenges ahead, ‘whether it’s meeting the urgent imperative of development, or delivering improved resilience and recovery from natural disasters’, and he stressed that the WTO would also help in meeting the big opportunities on the horizon as well — from boosting tourism, to creating a framework for more sustainable fisheries, to realising the benefits of improved internet access and connectivity. His remarks were broadcast at other USP campuses across the region.

During his visit to Fiji, the Director-General met President Jioji Konrote to discuss how the WTO can continue to support the country’s development goals and strengthen the bonds that exist between the region and the WTO. He also signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Dame Meg Taylor of the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat (PIFS), extending collaboration between the WTO and PIFS in a range of areas, including capacity building assistance. While in Suva, DG Azevêdo also opened a ‘regional trade policy workshop’ event, designed to deliver training on trade issues and the WTO for the Pacific region. The workshop was co-organized by the WTO and PIFS, and the Director-General was joined at the launch by Dame Meg Taylor and Minister Faiyaz Siddiq Koya. The Director-General’s remarks at the opening session of the workshop are available here.

DG remarks at the University of the South Pacific

Dame Meg Taylor,
Professor Armstrong,
Ladies and gentlemen,

Good afternoon – and hello to those watching this online. Thanks for tuning in.

I am very pleased to be here today at the University of the South Pacific. Thank you for your kind invitation. And congratulations on 50 years as the leading academic institution in the Pacific.

I think this institution embodies the close cooperation and unique challenges and opportunities that exist here in the Pacific. It is jointly owned by 12 governments and has a diverse student base from across the region.

This is actually my first visit to Fiji and to the Pacific Islands as WTO Director-General – so it is a real pleasure to join you.

I think that there is a special link between this region and the World Trade Organization. This is down to the strong bonds that exist between the countries of the region and the important role of the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat.

I have often found that smaller nations are more outward-facing than others, and more engaged with the world outside their borders. Countries that are not great powers rely more on the global system of cooperation and rules to ensure that they have a fair go. And of course smaller economies desperately need access to other markets in order to grow and develop.

The WTO provides all of this. It provides a platform for you to engage in the global economy under multilaterally-agreed rules, and it provides an opportunity to pursue your interests.

And that is what you do. Working together, the Pacific Islands have become important players in the debate at the WTO over the years. You have used the global system to address your needs.

I will detail some areas where real progress has been made in a moment – but of course there is much more to do. So I urge you to stay active and stay engaged.

With a strong and united stance, sharing many common interests, you really do have a voice in Geneva, and your representatives there do an excellent job in making sure that it is heard.

In fact, when I talked about ‘smaller economies’ a moment ago, perhaps I should have chosen my words more carefully.

According to some estimates, the members of the Pacific Islands Forum cover over 40 million square kilometres of land and sea. That is a bigger area than the European Union and ASEAN combined. This offers great potential in terms of access to natural resources. At the same time of course it also poses challenges of distance and vulnerability to natural disasters.

Again I think your desire to meet these opportunities and challenges stands behind your record as champions of international cooperation and multilateralism.

We all know that the hard work of the Pacific Island nations was essential to securing the Paris Climate Agreement in 2015. And Fiji of course played a key role in presiding over COP23 in Bonn last year.

Pacific Island countries were also a driving force behind the Oceans Conference in New York last year – focused on the implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 14 on the conservation and sustainable use of the oceans and marine resources for sustainable development.

The simple fact is that we are better placed to deal with the challenges before us when we work together. And your leadership and advocacy is particularly important today.

These are challenging times for multilateralism. This applies on a number of fronts, but let me focus particularly on what we are seeing in the trading system.

We have all seen recent headlines about rising tensions among major trading partners.

Despite this, trade is actually performing very well, and it continues to help drive the global economic recovery. Trade grew at a rate of 4.7% in 2017 – the strongest performance since 2011. And we expect this growth to continue, with economic cycles between China, the United States and the European Union synchronizing in a way that we have not seen for a decade.

This is all good news. It means that trade is playing its part in supporting growth, development and job creation.

However, all of that could be put at risk if the tensions that we have been seeing continue to escalate.

The global economy is profoundly interconnected today, and this multiplies the complications that trade-restrictive actions can cause. Two-thirds of world trade now occurs through global value chains. In this context, the effects of any shocks to the trading system would likely be globalised, reaching far beyond those countries who are directly involved.

The Pacific region is unlikely to be immune to this, so we have to do everything we can to avoid further escalation. I have been working closely with WTO members and urging them to take every action possible to avoid going down this road.

Instead of escalating tensions, we need to find ways to resolve them constructively.

The WTO has a key role to play here.

The organization was created as a forum for members to find ways to cooperate, resolve issues and hold each other to account. And this is what we’ve been doing. In fact, I would argue that, without the WTO, we would have started a trade war some years ago.

After the crisis of 2008 we did not see an outbreak of protectionist policies, as we did in the past. This could have dramatically worsened the economic fallout. In fact, the share of world imports covered by import-restrictive measures implemented since October 2008 is just 5%.  This quite contained reaction to the post-2008 protectionist pressures is precisely because of the framework of rules and practices provided by the multilateral trading system – by the WTO.

We need to safeguard the system so that it can keep playing this role – and so that it can keep supporting growth and development around the world. But just preserving the system is not enough. We also have to ensure that it helps to provide more opportunities – especially for those who need them the most.

Ensuring that everybody has the skills and tools they need to participate is an essential part of creating a trading system that is truly global and inclusive.

For this very reason we put a special focus on the trade conditions of the Small Island Developing Economies through our Work Programme on Small Economies. And this has delivered some important decisions in your favour.⁽¹⁾

We also have a number of initiatives to help countries build trading capacities.

For example, small economies have been permitted to use regional bodies for SPS and TBT notifications instead of each having to notify nationally

Through the WTO’s Aid for Trade initiative we provide developing countries with targeted assistance to improve their trading infrastructure. Since 2006, the initiative has committed around 4.1 billion dollars to Pacific Island economies.

We also support an initiative called the Enhanced Integrated Framework, which helps least developed countries to build their capacity to trade. The EIF has developed a number of projects in the Pacific, helping countries leverage their trading potential. For example, Vanuatu has been helped in rebuilding its tourism infrastructure in the aftermath of Cyclone Pam.

On all these fronts, we work very closely with the Geneva mission of the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat, to ensure that these initiatives deliver to your needs.

I should note, as well, that a number of Pacific members – namely Fiji, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu – have also opened missions in Geneva and I am hopeful that others will follow in due course.

Greater engagement gives you the chance to learn more about the WTO, and to help shape the trading system in your favour.

Members are making progress in this direction, by delivering new reforms to the system.

In recent years, we have delivered a number of meaningful agreements.

In 2013 in Bali, we delivered the Trade Facilitation Agreement. It was the biggest multilateral deal in a generation and will have huge economic significance, potentially cutting trade costs globally by an average of 14.3 per cent – with the biggest gains going to the developing and least-developed economies, including here in the Pacific. Indeed, these measures are particularly significant when your trade costs are already high due to the great distances that your imports and exports have to travel.

Fiji, Papua New Guinea and Samoa have ratified this deal, and I encourage the other Pacific Island WTO members to do so as swiftly as possible.

Two years later, in 2015 in Nairobi, members came together to deliver the biggest farm reform since the creation of the WTO, with the decision to abolish agricultural export subsidies.

Members have also agreed on a number of steps on cotton, and measures to help the poorest countries to boost their trading potential.

All this has shown that the WTO’s 164 members can work together in a meaningful way to solve the most complex problems they face, and deliver on the priorities of the most vulnerable.

The latest stage on this journey was our ministerial conference in Buenos Aires last year. While no major, final agreements were struck, members laid some positive foundations that we are now working to build on.

Levels of political support were high in Buenos Aires, and members committed to continuing negotiations in all areas, including the Doha issues. This is very important. And ministers took an important decision on fisheries subsidies which I know is a key area of interest for the region.

While we didn’t get the ambitious outcome that many were hoping for – including myself – it was a significant step forward.

Members committed to adopt an agreement on disciplines that prohibit certain forms of fisheries subsidies that contribute to overcapacity and overfishing, and to eliminate subsidies that contribute to illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing.

This a key target of Sustainable Development Goal 14 on the conservation and sustainable use of our oceans.

Clearly the ocean is a tremendous resource – but it must be used responsibly and sustainably, so that the Blue Economy can continue to serve future generations. But I don’t think I need to tell you that.

According to the World Bank, a more sustainable fisheries economy could boost public revenues in the Pacific Islands by 300 million US dollars per year by 2040. And it could create 15,000 additional jobs.

This is a huge opportunity. And I think that our work at the WTO can make an important contribution.

Members have agreed on a work programme for the fisheries subsidies negotiations for the coming months. Meetings started in Geneva last week. So let’s make sure we deliver on this vital issue.

Also in Buenos Aires groups of WTO members announced new initiatives in a number of other areas. They included talks on:

• how to help promote electronic commerce for inclusiveness,
• how to support smaller businesses to trade, so that they are not crowded out by bigger players,
• how to facilitate investments, and
• how to ensure that trade contributes fully to the economic empowerment of women.

There have been meetings under each of these initiatives in recent months. And in each case there seems to be real momentum. It is very positive that members are seeking to use the WTO to tackle matters that they consider to be of pressing economic importance. And it is interesting to look at the make-up of these new groups. They encompass developed, developing and least-developed countries, big and small.

Of course each member needs to determine for themselves whether and how best to engage in these areas.

That said, there could be interesting opportunities for the Pacific Islands here.

Studies show that improved Internet connectivity in the Pacific Islands could add more than 5 billion US dollars to the region’s GDP and close to 300,000 additional jobs by 2040. More investment – particularly in infrastructure – could also help the region tackle many of its trade costs, and boost the Pacific’s integration into the global economy.

We know that building resilient infrastructure is a priority in the Pacific, especially due to the ever-present risk of natural disasters.

The economic costs of such events are very high – to say nothing of the human cost. Some estimates show that these disasters can hit GDP by 0.5 to 6.6 per cent annually. And climate change will only increase the level of risk and vulnerability.

Rigorous studies suggest that the frequency and severity of natural disasters are likely to increase. This issue is not going away.

So we need to be better prepared and better informed the next time we are called upon to respond.

In this vein, WTO members have started a dialogue on how trade policies and practices can help in dealing with natural disasters.

The wrong measure could stifle recovery, erode resilience, and restrain development. But the right policy can help improve supply side capacity and restore trade after a disaster, boosting recovery. So we have to get this right and contribute in any way we can.

To help inform this discussion, just last month we launched a new research project to help countries analyse how trade can help them respond to and recover from natural disasters and build resilience to such events. It is a very important piece of work.

I am confident that the trade community can play a positive role in responding to this urgent issue. I am ready to support members in this effort.

The WTO is here to serve its members. It is here to serve you.

I want to see the WTO helping this region to meet the big challenges ahead – whether it’s meeting the urgent imperative of development, or delivering improved resilience and recovery from natural disasters.

And I want to do all we can to help you seize some of the big opportunities on the horizon too – whether it’s boosting tourism, creating a framework for more sustainable fisheries, or realising the benefits of improved internet access and connectivity.

That’s our job. But to deliver it we also need your support – especially at a time when multilateralism is under strain.

So I urge all countries in the region to use the system, and speak up for the system and for your interests in it.

Global cooperation is a precious resource. It is the only way that we will meet the challenges before us, and seize the opportunities. It is the only way to deliver the kind of future that I believe people in this region want and deserve.

I look forward to working with you all to that end.

Thank you.

Source: wto.org

 

 

47/ Japan’s lower house passes TPP trade deal

Japan’s lower house on Friday passed a bill to ratify the Trans-Pacific Partnership free trade pact, paving the way for its enactment before the current Diet session ends in June.

Following the US withdrawal, Japan and the other 10 countries hope to see the pact, renamed the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, take effect by the end of the year.

The agreement will enter into force 60 days after at least six countries conclude domestic procedures. Mexico has already done so.

In Japan, a ratification bill is automatically enacted 30 days after it has been sent to the House of Councillors. Friday’s approval by the House of Representatives sets the stage for enactment by the June 20 end of the current regular Diet session.

Japan hopes to ensure the pact comes into force at an early date as the administration of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is promoting free trade at a time of growing concern over protectionism under US President Donald Trump.

Tokyo is also seeking to encourage the United States to return to the TPP. Trump has expressed interest in rejoining the pact if the United States can get a “substantially better” agreement.

The members of the TPP 11 are Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam.

Source: Nikkei Asian Review

 

48/ Vietnam: Exporters Need to Self-Certify the Origin of Goods Exported to the EU

This would shift the responsibility for self-certification from the Import and Export Agency which is under the Ministry of Industry and Trade to the exporters, which will increase the exporter’s liability for authenticity. From 2019, exporters have to issue their own Certificate of Origin (C/O) by adding, “this product is qualified for GSP” in their invoices and documents.

Benefits of self-certification

This transition mandated by the EU will shift the responsibilities to the exporters, which will reduce the administrative burden and risk for government agencies. In addition, this will also streamline the overall process, reducing unnecessary cost and delays.

With respect to the EU-Vietnam free trade agreement, self-certification will ensure that domestic firms are updated about the rules of origin commitments and help them in qualifying for preferential tariff treatment.

Government support

The 2,700 Vietnamese firms that currently qualify for GSP and export goods to the EU would require government support to ensure a smooth transition towards self-certification. The government is planning to organize events and seminars to train exporters in self-certification of goods. In addition, they are also working on a circular that would guide firms exporting goods to the EU. Once the circular has been finalized, the government will work closely with the Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry (VCCI) and other provincial agencies to provide extensive training for exporters.

During the transition phase, if firms are unable to self-certify their goods, they can apply for an origin certificate from the VCCI and the Ministry of Industry and Trade, as they do now. Nevertheless, exporters should ensure that they can self-certify their goods by early 2019 to mitigate unnecessary cost and delays. In case, there are issues in determining the origin of goods or firms during trade, Vietnamese government agencies will provide the necessary information so that firms can work with the EU authorities in ensuring that their exports meet the necessary conditions.

Source: Vietnam-briefing

Ngày 22/5

49/ WTO-PIFS Regional Workshop on MC11 Outcomes and Way Forward

Remarks by DG Azevêdo

Minister Faiyaz Siddiq Koya,
Dame Meg Taylor,
Excellencies,
Ladies and gentlemen,

Good morning. It’s great to be here today at this workshop on the WTO, MC11 and the way forward for the Pacific.

I know that you have a packed agenda ahead of you, and I hope that this will be a useful and productive few days.

I want to thank the Government of Fiji for hosting this event. I also want to thank the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat and WTO colleagues for their work in putting this event together.

One of our main priorities in the WTO is to ensure that everyone has the capacity to use trade as a tool to promote growth and development.

As I said at the University of the South Pacific yesterday, we want to help the region to seize all of the opportunities in the trading system. Technical assistance and capacity-building programmes, like this one, play a very important role in helping smaller countries to better understand the legal intricacies of global trade.

With this in mind we have been organizing some very specialized and targeted courses for the Pacific members. It is only with enhanced understanding and knowledge of WTO agreements and evolving trade developments that you can maximize the gains from the multilateral trading system.

Therefore I am very pleased that Dame Meg Taylor and I have now extended the Memorandum of Understanding between our organizations to keep working closely together in the years to come.

This is welcome news. I am certain that our partnership will go from strength to strength to help the Pacific successfully integrate into the global economy.

Indeed, Pacific islands have been working hard to strengthen their economies – and we are seeing concrete results.

Samoa graduated from LDC status in 2014. Meanwhile, Kiribati, Tuvalu, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu are expected to graduate by 2024. This is very encouraging. LDC graduation demonstrates solid economic and social progress. However, graduation can also bring new challenges.

For example, I know that losing preferential market access is an important concern amongst many of you when it comes to graduation.

How this change impacts a graduating LDC depends on many factors. However, WTO members are well aware of this concern. In fact, some members have been allowing an extended transition period to graduated LDCs so that they can adjust to the phasing out of LDC preferences.

We all need to work together to find constructive ways forward and extend all possible assistance for graduated LDCs – just as we do for those yet to graduate.

Of course, the WTO Secretariat is available to help build capacity on this front. For example, we are always ready to organize targeted seminars to help assess challenges, identify gaps, and improve your understanding on all these issues. Don’t hesitate to reach out to us if we can help in any way.

We must ensure that the system works for you, and that it responds to your needs and priorities.

So this brings me to the focus of today’s discussion, which is the 11th Ministerial Conference, and the way forward.

As you know, we made real progress at our 9th Ministerial Conference, which was held in Bali, and at the 10th Ministerial Conference in Nairobi.

At MC11 in Buenos Aires, members did not reach major, final agreements, but we did make important progress. You will discuss the results of MC11 in more detail in the coming days, so I will just give you a quick overview.

The Conference saw a huge show of political support for the WTO. And it saw members take a number of important decisions. They included:

• the decision on the e-commerce work programme and to extend the moratorium on customs duties for electronic transmissions;
• the decision on TRIPS non-violation and situation complaints;
• the decision on the work programme on small economies;
• and, significantly, the decision on fisheries subsidies, which is a priority for the Pacific.

Here, members committed to negotiate an agreement by the end of 2019, which would limit harmful government subsidies for fishing. They also agreed that the deal should recognize the need for special and differential treatment for developing and least developed countries.

Success on this front would be a big achievement for WTO members, and would help deliver on Sustainable Development Goal 14.6 on sustainable fishing.

Work on fisheries subsidies has already begun in Geneva. Members have agreed on a work programme around multi-day meeting clusters, each organized around a theme. These clusters will happen in May, June and July.

They include technical sessions, time for bilateral meetings among delegations, focused thematic discussions, and further debates. Meetings have already started, and I’m sure this will be discussed in your upcoming sessions.

I will be doing all I can to support and facilitate members in driving this work forward.

On other fronts, members committed in Buenos Aires to continuing negotiations on all issues, including on those areas where progress has eluded us since the launch of the Doha Round.

We also saw an outbreak of dynamism in Buenos Aires, as groups of members declared their desire to discuss a range of other issues which they consider to be of economic significance.

• 71 WTO members, including the US, launched work on e-commerce. Those members account for around 77% of global trade.
• A group of 70 members launched work on investment facilitation.
• A group of 87 members launched work on reducing obstacles which prevent small businesses from trading.
• And 118 WTO members and observers agreed to take action on trade and women’s economic empowerment.

So in a nutshell that’s what happened at MC11.

The task now is to find viable ways forward.

We need to find a framework for our conversations that is open-minded and creative enough to allow fresh perspectives to emerge and new pathways to be explored, building on the numerous proposals that are already on the table.

Of course the engine room of our negotiating work is the formal negotiating groups. Chairs have now been appointed to all of these groups, and we are seeing members meeting and engaging. There have also been very useful engagements at the ministerial level, with informal meetings convened by Switzerland, India and, later this week, by APEC.

We are still in the early stages of this work. Precisely how we move forward on all these issues is up to the membership. Like everything that we do at the organization, progress has to be driven by members. I stand ready to support you in any way that I can. We will keep working, and I will be pushing members to keep up the momentum.

I should also say a word about the initiatives that are happening outside the Negotiating Groups – specifically those groups of members that are pursuing conversations on e-commerce, small businesses, and so on.

These efforts are truly member-driven, and so how they evolve is a matter for the proponents to determine. I have simply urged the members involved to be as open, transparent and inclusive as possible, and to be as respectful of other members’ positions as possible.

Looking ahead, I think that we need to maintain a sense of urgency on all issues.

I also believe we have to learn from our successes.

The Trade Facilitation Agreement remains a great, galvanising, uniting force for WTO members. The Agreement broke new ground in the way it was designed, with flexibility at its core.

It provides developing countries and LDCs with the flexibility to tailor the implementation of their commitments according to their specific circumstances. In addition, the Agreement provides for the necessary practical support to help these members with implementation.

Of course, the TFA structure is certainly not a panacea. But it shows that flexibility and the search for common ground can deliver benefits for all.

We should keep those lessons in mind as we try to chart a path forward in all our work.

All this activity shows that members see value in the WTO platform to address issues of interest to them.

The debate on trade and natural disasters that I mentioned yesterday is another example of that.

In fact, the issue of natural disasters had already come up in the WTO’s work. For example, a feature of the debate on the Trade Facilitation Agreement was its ability to help hasten the movement of relief supplies in such circumstances. We’ve also seen waivers granted to allow trade preferences after particular catastrophic events.

So this is not a new conversation. What is new is members’ drive to be more proactive on this issue. It’s vital that we are better prepared and better informed the next time we are called upon to respond.

Overall, it is very positive to see this dynamism in the WTO.

The tensions between major economies can often dominate the trade debate – and we are doing everything we can to avoid a harmful escalation. But despite this, it’s vital to recognize that our work goes on in Geneva, all members remain engaged, and trade continues to be a potent force for growth and development around the world.

So I hope the course will give you a real taste of all this. I hope you can soak up the information you need, and get even more engaged.

Besides our regular meetings and negotiating work, there will be a number of major opportunities for you to engage at the WTO this year, including:

• the Global Forum on Inclusive Trade for LDCs in June, where the Pacific will be a special focus;
• the Public Forum in October, where we will discuss trade and sustainability in the context of the SDGs; and
• the ‘Geneva Week’ events in July and at the end of the year, for members without permanent representatives in Geneva.

I hope to welcome you to these events.

As ever, I am ready to work with you to make sure that your interests remain at the centre of our work.

Together, we can build a more prosperous and resilient future for the Pacific Islands.

Thank you.

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 23/5

50/ India initiates WTO dispute complaint against US steel, aluminium duties

India has requested WTO dispute consultations with the United States regarding US duties on certain imported steel and aluminium products. The request was circulated to WTO members on 23 May.

India claims the US duties of 25% and 10% on imports of steel and aluminium products respectively are inconsistent with provisions of the WTO’s General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 and of the Agreement on Safeguards.

Further information is available in document WT/DS547/1.

What is a request for consultations?

The request for consultations formally initiates a dispute in the WTO. Consultations give the parties an opportunity to discuss the matter and to find a satisfactory solution without proceeding further with litigation. After 60 days, if consultations have failed to resolve the dispute, the complainant may request adjudication by a panel.

Source: wto.org

 

51/ Farm subsidies: the coming fight at the WTO

India needs to defend policies that make agriculture remunerative and stand by its poor at this stage of development

In an attempt to combat rural distress, the Union budget announced this year by finance minister Arun Jaitley promised a new deal to farmers—minimum support prices (MSP) that would be 150% of the cost of production.

The government is expected to announce the first set of support prices under the new policy in the coming weeks, just before the kharif sowing season begins. The second phase, to be rolled out in October, would ensure that MSP benefits the farmers of 23 notified crops. The details are being worked out by NITI Aayog.

However, the new MSP policy could pull India into a confrontation at the World Trade Organization (WTO). Higher MSPs will likely make Indian farm subsidies breach the limit that the WTO finds acceptable. The Narendra Modi government should roll up its sleeves to fight back, especially given the recent face-off between India and the US over farm subsidies.

After taking on China, US President Donald Trump seems to be shifting some of his attention to India. The US has announced that it will be dragging India to the WTO because it claims India has under-reported the market price support (MPS) for rice and wheat. According to the US, the MPS for wheat and rice, respectively, appears to be over 60% and 70% of the total value of production, against the permissible cut-off of 10%. India is planning to officially respond at the WTO’s committee on agriculture meeting in June.

India needs to question the foundation of the entire subsidy regime defined by the WTO. The relevant question is not how much support a government can provide to farmers to avoid distorting trade. It is how much it should provide to feed a country that is home to a fourth of the world’s hungry population.

Also, small farmers and poor consumers in developing countries are the most vulnerable to volatile price movements in commodity markets. The Union government needs to begin making its case by questioning the way WTO calculates subsidies, as well as the way the rich countries support their farmers. For example, for the purpose of calculating current subsidies, the WTO uses the average of 1986-88 global prices as the base. Therefore, the difference between the ongoing MSP and these reference prices looks too high.

India, along with other developing countries, should make persistent efforts to fight the way WTO rules have been rigged to suit the developed countries. Last year, before the 11th ministerial committee meeting of WTO at Buenos Aires, India and China jointly submitted a paper, Elimination Of AMS To Reduce Distortions In Global Agricultural Trade, to the WTO. The paper highlighted the subsidies that developed countries dole out to their farmers. The six industrialized nations are entitled to an overall cap for their farm subsidy called aggregate measurement of support (AMS), which entails subsidy up to 10% of the value of total production. This gives them an opportunity to manipulate the subsidies for individual products. For instance, product-specific support in the US and the European Union crosses over 50% for a number of crops and reaches as high as 89% for rice in the US. Developing countries, on the other hand, are trapped with a product-specific de minimis limit of 10%—for no crop can the AMS be higher than 10% of its value of production.

Interestingly, as noted by Mint columnist D. Ravi Kanth in November 2015, the US hands over about an average of $50,000 to every farmer, while India gives only around $200 per farmer. According to Scientific American, the agricultural subsidies support given to grain producers by the US government is insane enough to fuel obesity in the country. The European Union’s common agriculture policy takes up 40% of its budget.

The US has also launched a case against India’s export promotion schemes. These schemes—market access initiative (MAI), market development assistance (MDA) and merchandise exports from India scheme (Meis)—are primarily aimed at promoting better export-oriented infrastructure facilities, capacity building, and export competitiveness. They also assist exporters of agriculture and processed food products, thereby indirectly benefitting small and marginal farmers. These schemes are, therefore, critical in keeping agriculture remunerative in India and hence are worth defending at the WTO.

Therefore, India needs to make it clear at the WTO that it needs to stand by its poor at this stage of development, and that trade law should not meddle with the fight against poverty and hunger.

Soure: Livemint

52/ Businesses need to adapt themselves to CPTPP commitments

Fundamental commitments of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) and recommendations for businesses took centre stage of a conference co-hosted by the Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry (VCCI) and the Ministry of Industry and Trade in Hanoi on May 22.

In his remarks, Deputy Minister of Industry and Trade Tran Quoc Khanh said the CPTPP will give a major boost to international trade and investment as well as intra-bloc trade activities as it is the highest-standard agreement that Vietnam has participated in to date.

However, Vietnamese businesses should equip themselves with knowhow to utilize its benefits and avoid related risks, he said.

Luong Hoang Thai, Director of the Ministry of Industry and Trade’s Multilateral Trade Policy Department, said the trade pact will help promote the Government’s reform progress as well as the image of Vietnam as a supporter of free trade in line with international law.

The trade deal will provide a good opportunity for Vietnam to open more its market, intensify investment, step up international cooperation, general more jobs, and reduce poverty, he noted.

Attendees said the CPTPP’s stringent regulations will be requirements but also give a chance to the Southeast Asian nation to accelerate reform, revamp institutions, and fully realize its commitments to the pact.

According to VCCI Chairman Vu Tien Loc, Vietnamese businesses need to keep themselves updated with information about the regulations on product origins and standards and customers’ demand in CPTPP member markets, as well as the agreement’s impacts on different types of commodities.

The trade pact will offer a wealth of opportunity for Vietnam to attract more investment, increase international cooperation and exports, and fine-tune its institutions, he said.

The 11 CPTPP members are Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam.

Japan and the 10 countries taking part in the deal after the US’s withdrawal in January 2017 aim to put the deal into force possibly by the end of 2018 or in early 2019.

Source: VOV

 

Ngày 24/5

53/ DG Azevêdo in Papua New Guinea: ‘WTO gives smaller economies the platform to succeed’

Director-General Roberto Azevêdo visited Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea, on 24 May, meeting with Minister Rimbink Pato to discuss how trade can continue to serve the country in the years to come. The Director-General noted the importance of the WTO in giving smaller economies like Papua New Guinea the support and the platform they need to succeed in global markets. They discussed the role of trade in relation to recovery from natural disasters, the sustainability of oceans, and building a more inclusive global economy. The Director-General welcomed Papua New Guinea’s ratification of the Trade Facilitation Agreement, which could potentially cut trade costs for the country by up to 13.9 per cent. While in Port Moresby, DG Azevêdo also spoke at the launch of a new APEC discussion series at the University of Papua New Guinea. His speech is available below.

Remarks by DG Azevêdo

Ministers,

Excellencies,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Good afternoon. Thank you for your kind invitation.

It’s a real pleasure to be here in Papua New Guinea.

The Pacific countries are very important members of the WTO. And while you may be far away from Geneva, I can assure you that your voices are heard there as loud as any other.

Also, perhaps because of the unique challenges of this region, you are big champions of the trading system. And Papua New Guinea’s leadership in APEC this year is a clear sign of that international engagement.

This is very positive. Groupings like APEC can complement the multilateral system and act as a building block for  global trade.

In fact, the Asia-Pacific region is a dynamic example of how trade initiatives being pursued at the regional level can have a significant and positive impact on the multilateral system.

However, even if all of the ongoing negotiations in the context of regional trade agreements could be completed tomorrow, we would still need the WTO.

Through its system of mutually-agreed rules and practices, the WTO provides the platform on which all other trade agreements are built. And as such it is extremely important to ensure the stability and predictability of the global economy.

It could even be argued that without the WTO, we would have been in a trade war some years ago.

After the crisis of 2008 we did not see an outbreak of protectionist policies, as we did in the past. This is precisely because of the framework of rules and practices provided by the multilateral trading system – by the WTO.

So we need to continue strengthening and defending the system, especially in the current circumstances.

We’ve all seen the recent headlines about the rising trade tensions between some major economies. I’m sure that this situation is of real concern to us all.

In an interconnected economy, the effects of any shocks to the trading system would likely be globalised, reaching far beyond those countries who are directly involved.

I am talking to all sides to try to resolve this situation.

Of course, bilateral contacts can also help in finding ways forward. We are seeing these conversations taking place – and there have been some more positive signs emerging in recent days.

Instead of escalating tensions, we need to find ways to resolve them constructively.

In addition to this, we are also facing a challenge in the WTO’s Dispute Settlement System with the impasse in the nominations for the Appellate Body. This is a serious concern for us all, as the dispute settlement function underpins the whole trading system.

I am working with members here, and urging them to actively engage towards finding potential solutions. We need to act on this situation as quickly as we possibly can.

This is fundamental so that the organization can continue to do its job.

We are also seeing issues of great importance to the Pacific being discussed in Geneva.

For example, we know that natural disasters are a big challenge for the region. The people of Papua New Guinea know all too well the human toll that these events can have, following February’s devastating earthquake. Rigorous studies suggest that the frequency and severity of natural disasters are likely to increase. This issue is not going away.

In this vein, WTO members have started a dialogue on how trade policies and practices can help in dealing with natural disasters.

The wrong measure could stifle recovery, erode resilience and restrain development. But the right policy can boost recovery by helping to improve supply side capacity and restoring trade after a disaster. So we have to get this right and contribute in any way we can.

In fact, the issue of natural disasters had already come up in the WTO’s work. For example, a feature of the debate on the WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement was its ability to help hasten the movement of relief supplies in such circumstances. We’ve also seen waivers granted to allow trade preferences after particular catastrophic events.

So this is not a new conversation. What is new is members’ drive to be more proactive on this issue. It’s vital that we are better prepared and better informed the next time we are called upon to respond.

We are also working on other fronts to ensure that the trading system remains responsive and relevant to members – and to ensure that it meets the demands of a rapidly evolving global economy.

In recent years, WTO members have succeeded in delivering a number of important reforms.

Major breakthroughs include:

• the 2013 Trade Facilitation Agreement – which I just mentioned,
• the 2015 agreement to eliminate agricultural export subsidies, and
• a series of steps to support our least-developed members.

In addition, a group of members struck a deal to expand the Information Technology Agreement in 2015, which eliminates tariffs on a wide range of information technology products.

These deals have a huge economic significance.

For example, implementation of the Trade Facilitation Agreement could potentially cut trade costs in Papua New Guinea by up to 13.9 per cent. And these measures are particularly significant when your trade costs are already high due to the great distances that your imports and exports have to travel.

Papua New Guinea ratified this deal last year, and I encourage you to keep up the momentum on implementation, so you can reap its benefits. In fact, the Agreement provides the necessary practical support to help members with implementation, so the Secretariat will be ready to help on this point.

After this series of successes, the latest step in this journey was our Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires last year. No final agreements were reached this time, but important progress was made.

On fisheries subsidies for example, members committed to secure a deal to limit harmful subsidies by the end of 2019. Success here would deliver on Sustainable Development Goal 14.6 on sustainable fisheries – and I think it would be a major achievement for the WTO membership.

I know that this is an issue of great importance to Papua New Guinea. These negotiations have resumed in Geneva so I encourage you to remain active and engaged to help take this issue forward.

At the Buenos Aires Ministerial, members also committed to continuing negotiations on all issues, including where progress has eluded us since the launch of the Doha Round.

So we will keep working, and I will be pushing members to find fresh perspectives that may help us advance this work.

Also in Buenos Aires, groups of WTO members announced new initiatives in a number of other areas. They included talks on:

• how to help promote electronic commerce for inclusiveness,
• how to support smaller businesses to trade, so that they are not crowded out by bigger players,
• how to facilitate investments – which are critical to build connectivity infrastructure, and
• how to ensure that trade contributes fully to the economic empowerment of women.

These groups encompass developed, developing and least-developed countries, big and small, and they will remain open for all members to join.

However, I want to stress that all this is very recent and work in progress. At this stage these are just discussions. We need to see how these initiatives develop.

Each member needs to determine for themselves whether and how best to engage in these areas.

That said, there could be interesting opportunities for Papua New Guinea and the other Pacific Islands here in helping to overcome the challenges posed by geography.

Studies show that improved Internet connectivity in the Pacific Islands could add more than 5 billion US dollars to the region’s GDP and close to 300,000 additional jobs by 2040. More investment – particularly in infrastructure – could also help the region tackle many of its trade costs, and boost the Pacific’s integration into the global economy.

In taking forward all of the issues I’ve mentioned today, Papua New Guinea’s support will be essential – through APEC, through the Pacific Islands Forum and as a strong, independent WTO member as well.

I think that we can do a great deal, working together, to respond to the unique challenges and opportunities that we see in this region.

So I urge Papua New Guinea and countries across the region to keep using the system, and to keep speaking up for the system and your interests in it.

I look forward to working with you all to that end.

Thank you.

Source: wto.org

 

54/ WTO members discuss way forward for agriculture talks

Agriculture negotiators met at the WTO on 24 May to lay the foundations for future discussions on farm issues. The new chair of the Committee on Agriculture, Ambassador John Ronald Dipchandra Ford, reported on his recent consultations with members. He said the challenge is to engage differently, to use negotiators’ time differently, and to achieve outcomes differently.

Report by the chair

The chair said he was encouraged by WTO members’ commitment to agriculture reform in spite of “some clouds that hang over the negotiating environment in general”. He stated: “I am confident that we will be able to work intensively and collectively to make progress in the negotiations.”

Instead of having a topic-by-topic discussion, the chair invited members to deliberate on his report regarding his on recent consultations with members and to provide him with “collective guidance” on the process and substance for future farm talks.

Summing up the chief lessons learned in the run-up to the 11th Ministerial Conference (MC11) in Buenos Aires in December 2017, the chair said there is a need to engage differently, with increased inclusiveness and transparency. Some delegations considered it critical to combine political will with data-based technical work throughout the negotiating process. Instead of aiming for a highly ambitious outcome, an incremental approach to achieving a substantive outcome was suggested.

Furthermore, some members were of the view that there was not enough focus on the broad objectives of the negotiations, the chair said. Some had made reference to the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), to which the agriculture talks could be an important contributor.

Regarding negotiation timelines, the chair said a clear message from many members was: “Time ran out at MC11 and this should not be allowed to happen again.” Some members said work towards achieving consensus should already take place in Geneva before the next Ministerial Conference. Many members called for an immediate resumption of negotiations and some warned against setting artificial and impracticable deadlines.

The chair noted that many members underlined the importance of “finding a way to build on past work”, and he invited all proponents to indicate how they would like to address previous proposals in the post MC11 negotiations.

With respect to the substance of the talks, “priorities remained broadly the same as they were before MC11”, noted the chair. The topics addressed in his consultations were domestic support, market access, export competition, export restrictions, cotton, public stockholding for food security purposes and the special safeguard mechanism.

The chair noted members generally agreed that sound analytical work could help to facilitate fact-based discussions. Many members expressed the view that work aimed at improving available information should be addressed in parallel to the negotiations. Organizing seminars and workshops to keep negotiators well informed was welcomed by most members, as was the use of information prepared by the WTO Secretariat and other international organizations.  But some members pointed out the sensitivity of such information and dissemination exercises.

Wrapping up the session, the chair noted that many members highlighted the critical importance of the agriculture negotiations. He noted the broad support expressed by the membership for information sharing exercises to improve members’ discussions. He also took note of the need expressed by several members to remain cautious about such exercises.

The chair announced his intention to hold more informal special sessions addressing the priority issues raised, including dedicated sessions on public stockholding and the special safeguard mechanism.

He concluded: “The difficult environment should not discourage our engagement. With hard work, dedication and flexibility on all sides, we should be able to agree on how we proceed, close the gaps on negotiating issues and will certainly give ourselves a fair chance of working towards an outcome at MC12 and beyond.”

The chair’s report is available here (JOB/AG/136).

Members’ discussions

Members’ discussions focused on the way forward, priorities for the talks, information sharing and when to resume the negotiations. Their priorities remained broadly the same as before MC11, with domestic support and cotton being considered as priority issues by many delegations; public stockholding and the special safeguard mechanism also remained high on the agenda, notably for the proponents. Nevertheless, several speakers reiterated the importance of market access, export competition and export restrictions. The role of the farm talks in achieving the SDG of zero hunger was also acknowledged.

Some members called for immediate resumption of negotiations. But not everybody shared the same sense of urgency. One member asked for more reflection to better understand the current challenges farmers face.  The importance of information sharing was stressed by many, with most of the members favouring addressing it in parallel to the negotiations.

Cairns group members (a group of agricultural exporting nations) submitted a document (JOB/AG/134) summarizing their comments on the way forward, in which they called for “restarting” the negotiations and underscored their “strong interest in addressing the inherent risks to global agricultural trade and food security caused by the accumulation of excessive domestic support entitlements” as well as their openness to explore ideas across all pillars. Acknowledging that some areas will be harder than others, the group members called for finding a way forward “which ensures that all members make a contribution and believe the outcome is a “win-win”".

Source: wto.org

 

Ngày 25/5

55/ DG Azevêdo calls on APEC members to help address challenges in global trade

Addressing a meeting of APEC trade ministers in Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea, on 25 May, Director-General Roberto Azevêdo called on ministers to address rising trade tensions and to step up efforts to advance the WTO’s work in a number of areas. During their session on ‘Supporting the Multilateral Trading System’, which had a thematic focus on the digital economy, the Director-General also updated ministers on ongoing debates in Geneva following the WTO’s 11th Ministerial Conference (MC11) in Buenos Aires.

The Director-General said:

“APEC members have long been champions of the global trading system. I urge ministers to stay active and engaged, and to play their part – both in resolving the critical issues before us today and in finding ways to continue strengthening and improving the multilateral trading system. An escalation in trade tensions would affect everyone across the Asia-Pacific region, and beyond. Working together through the WTO, we have resolved previous tensions and helped to preserve the stability of the global economy. We must do the same again today.

“To remain strong, effective and relevant, the trading system must also be responsive to its members. With the global economy changing before our eyes, members should feel able to discuss issues of emerging economic importance at the WTO – including in relation to the digital economy and issues of economic inclusion. The leadership of APEC members will continue to be important here.

“Work is also continuing in Geneva to advance negotiations after MC11. On all issues, it will be essential to find new ideas that could lead to convergence. And in all of these areas, I ask for the support of APEC members. The work on fisheries subsidies is a notable bright spot. These discussions are proceeding with a real sense of urgency following the decision taken by members in Buenos Aires.”

Source: wto.org

 

56/ VN attends economic forum

A Vietnamese delegation has arrived for the 22nd St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF-2018) which opened at the Expoforum Convention and Exhibition Centre in Saint Petersburg City, Russia.

The event is being held from May 24-26 under the direction of Russian President Vladimir Putin. About 10,000 delegates from more than 120 countries attended the forum.

The Vietnamese delegation is led by Nguyễn Văn Bình, who is Politburo member, Secretary of the Central Party Committee and Head of the Central Economic Commission of the Communist Party of Việt Nam.

Representatives at the forum represent the largest Russian and foreign companies, State leaders and politicians, heads of government, deputy prime ministers, ministers and governors of provinces.

SPIEF serves as a platform for dialogue on key issues in the world economy, regional integration and the development of new industrial and technological sectors, as well as on the global challenges facing Russia and other nations.

Under the forum’s central theme ‘Creating an Economy of Trust’, delegates will discuss the impact of digital technology on all aspects of life, including “hot” issues such as artificial intelligence, gene therapy and technology excellence in medicine.

The SPIEF-2018’s activities focus on four main themes, including The Global Economy in an Era of Change; Russia: Utilising Growth Potential; Human Capital in the Digital Economy; and Leadership Technologies.

TASS news agency, an information partner of Vietnam News Agency, is the main information partner and image provider for the forum. TASS is also the coordinator of the Advisory Board on Foreign Investment in Russia at the forum.

Delegates held round-table discussions on investment issues, relations between Russia and China, and relations between Russia and European countries. The most awaited event on the opening day was the meeting between President Putin and members of the International Expert Council of the Russian Direct Investment Fund and representatives of the international investment community. It is expected that the 40 largest fund managers in the world from 20 countries will attend the meeting.

In 2017, SPIEF gathered 14,000 delegates representing 143 countries around the world. In the framework of the forum last year, 400 investment deals worth nearly two trillion roubles (US$32.5 billion) were signed.

Source: Vietnam News

57/ India takes US steel tariffs complaint to the WTO

India has launched a complaint against the United States to challenge US President Donald Trump’s tariffs on steel and aluminium, a filing published by the World Trade Organization showed on Wednesday.

Indian officials said last month that their government would open a WTO dispute if the country’s firms were not granted an exemption.

Mr Trump imposed the tariffs in March, levying 25 per cent on steel imports and 10 per cent on aluminium. He said they were justified by national security concerns and therefore outside the WTO’s remit.

India, China, Russia, Japan, Turkey and the European Union have all dismissed that claim, regarding the US tariffs as “safeguards” under the WTO rules, entitling them to a combined US$3.5 billion in annual compensation.

India’s retaliation claim seeks to recoup a cost of US$31 million levied on its aluminium exports and US$134 million on steel, and it has said it could target US exports of soya oil, palmolein and cashew nuts in its retaliation.

Its latest legal challenge seeks to force the United States to scrap the tariffs entirely. It follows a similar move last month by China, which Washington called “completely baseless”.

Under WTO rules, the United States has 60 days to settle the complaint, after which India could ask the WTO to set up an expert panel to adjudicate.

However, uncertainty is hanging over the WTO’s dispute settlement system because Mr Trump is vetoing the appointment of new appeals judges.

In its complaint, India listed a string of ways the US tariffs violated the WTO rules and unfairly damaged India’s interests.

It said they broke the WTO’s safeguards agreement and the United States was trying to use its tariffs to get other countries to agree to “voluntary export restraints”.

The United States had also exceeded the maximum import tariff allowed by the WTO and the tariffs were not applied uniformly to steel and aluminium imports from all suppliers, breaking a core principle of the WTO rulebook.

Source: The Bussiness Times

 

Ngày 28/5

58/ Ankara officially informed about Jordan’s intent to terminate FTA

Jordan has officially informed Turkey of its intent to completely terminate the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between the two countries after efforts to find a “just” solution for the benefit of both sides reached a deadlock, an official said on Sunday.

“After we suspended the deal with Turkey, we held several meetings to find some solutions and we met with Turkish officials as Jordan did not benefit from the deal, but to no avail,” Minister of State, Industry and Supply Yaroub Qudah told The Jordan Times on Sunday.

In April, Jordan said it was willing to reactivate the free trade agreement with Turkey, which was suspended in March, if Turkey agrees to meet certain conditions.

The terms include the Turkish side’s consent to protection measures Jordan will design to protect local industries, increasing Turkish technical assistance to Jordan as stipulated by the FTA and reconsidering the “strict” rules of origin specifications applied by Turkey. Jordan wanted Ankara to adopt the same relaxed rules of origin Jordan enjoys under a deal signed with the EU.

“We presented many suggestions to amend the agreement during our meetings with the Turkish authorities so both countries can benefit from the deal, but nothing happened,” said the minister, adding that intensive meetings were held between Jordanian and Turkish officials to come up with a solution.

“The agreement had a negative impact on the Jordanian industries due to the imbalanced competition between Jordanian and Turkish products,” said Qudah.

The government’s March decision to suspend the deal was welcomed by industrialists but slammed by traders.

At the time, government officials said that Turkey did not transfer know-how to improve national industries as agreed upon in the deal, adding that Turkey’s exports to Jordan sharply rocketed after the deal went into effect.

Before 2011, Turkey’s annual exports to Jordan, excluding oil, reached $23 million, with customs fees being collected; after the deal went into effect, Turkish exports to Jordan, excluding oil, reached around $135 million annually, with nothing being disbursed in customs fees to the Treasury, according to the Amman Chamber of Commerce.

Source: Jordan Times

 

59/ APEC trade ministers fail to agree on multilateral trade system

Trade ministers from 21-member economies of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum concluded talks on May 26 in Papua New Guinea without reaching agreement on the issue of a multilateral trading system.

After the two-day gathering, the ministers released a joint statement covering discussion areas including promoting the digital economy and deepening regional economic integration.

However, the ministers struggled to agree on the issue of a multilateral trading system.

Papua New Guinea Foreign Affairs and Trade Minister Rimbink Pato, who is also Chairman of the conference, issued a separate statement reflecting his assessment of the prevailing views of APEC economies.

Accordingly, the APEC trade ministers stressed that trade liberalisation and facilitation are essential for achieving sustainable global growth. They committed to continuing APEC’s leadership to promote free and open markets while fighting against protectionism.

The statements will be submitted to APEC leaders for their consideration ahead of their summit in November in Port Moresby capital, Papua New Guinea.

APEC groups Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, China, Hong Kong (China), Indonesia, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Peru, the Philippines, Russia, Singapore, Taiwan (China), Thailand, the United States and Vietnam.

Source: VOV

 

Ngày 29/5

60/ RoK helps Vietnam build e-government system

Vietnam and the Republic of Korea (RoK) will join hands to develop e-government system in Vietnam under a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) inked on May 25 between Minister-Chairman of the Government Office Mai Tien Dung and RoK Minister of Interior and Safety Kim Boo-kyum.

Vietnam wants to learn the RoK’s strategies and solutions to building e-government, Dung said, noting that both sides need to set up a channel to exchange information and establish a joint working group for long-term and effective cooperation.

“I hope that the two countries will actively implement the MoU and the Minister of Interior and Safety will back the Vietnamese Government Office to carry out the agreement”, Dung said.

Kim Boo-kyum, for his part, expressed his belief that as Vietnam holds a significant part in the “New Southern Policy” of RoK President Moon Jae-in, the bilateral relations will be deepened in various fields, including diplomacy, economy and culture.

Regarding the building of e-government system, the RoK Government sees Vietnam as its important partner and a group of Korean experts was sent to Vietnam in December 2017 and March 2018 to discuss the e-government building cooperation project, he stressed.

The RoK has been successful in building e-government system. The country ranked third in the UN’s e-government survey in 2016 thanks to its legal corridors for information technology application in e-government development.

The same day, Dung had a working session with the RoK Minister of Science and ICT.

On May 23, he met with RoK Government Policy Coordination Minister Hong Nam-ki, who hoped that the Vietnamese Government will create favourable conditions for the Korean investors in the country and support RoK financial and cosmetics firms who want to break into Vietnamese market in handling procedures.

On the occasion, Dung invited Hong to pay an official visit to Vietnam in a proper time and the later accepted the invitation with pleasure.

During his stay in the RoK from May 22-27, the Vietnamese official received representatives from large corporations, visited Samsung SDS and the national database centre in Daejeon city, and surveyed smart city model in Incheon city.

Source: VNA

61/ Japan files appeal against panel ruling regarding Korean duties on pneumatic valves

On 28 May Japan filed an appeal regarding a WTO panel report in the case brought by Japan in “Korea — Anti-Dumping Duties on Pneumatic Valves from Japan” (DS504). The panel circulated its report on 12 April 2018.

Further information will be available within the next few days in document WT/DS504/5

Parties to a dispute can appeal a panel’s ruling. Appeals have to be based on points of law, such as legal interpretation — they cannot re-open factual findings made by the panel. Each appeal is heard by three members of a permanent seven-member Appellate Body comprising persons of recognized authority and unaffiliated with any government. The Appellate Body membership broadly represents the geographic range of WTO membership, with each member appointed for a fixed term. Generally, the Appellate Body has up to 3 months to conclude its report.

Source: wto.org

Ngày 30/5

62/ Can RCEP negotiations be concluded by end-2018?

The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) inched closer to completion last March when the ministers of all 16 countries met in Singapore for their fourth intersessional meeting. Next up on the almanac for leaders is a ministerial meeting which will be held in Tokyo on 1 July.

Participating economies in RCEP include all 10 members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Japan, South Korea, China, India, New Zealand and Australia. The mega deal covers trade in goods and services, investment, economic and technical cooperation, intellectual property, competition, dispute settlement and e-commerce.

Thus far, one chapter on Economic and Technical Cooperation and another on Small and Medium Enterprises have been concluded. Still, there is plenty left for the 16 members to hash out in the upcoming meeting in a month’s time.

High up on the order of priorities is tariffs. India, which represents almost 10 percent of the combined Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of RCEP economies has long been dragging its feet on the issue of tariffs. India is currently being pressured to free tariff lines on 92 percent of items for all RCEP members including China but has countered that with 80 percent of all tariff lines with a 6 percent deviation either way.

Analysts have long expected India to agree on stiffer tariff regulations only if it receives heavy concessions for its services exports in return. Sanchita Basu Das, Lead Researcher of Economic Affairs at the Singapore based Yusof Ishak Institute told The ASEAN Post that New Delhi has also been pushing for greater services sector liberalisation especially in professional labour mobility.

“India wants to provide a tiered tariff structure – for ASEAN, China and the rest. As RCEP is a comprehensive agreement, it also wants to negotiate for movement of professional in lieu of giving market access. This is a sticky issue and is prolonging the discussion.” she said in an email reply.

According to Das, ultimately, India cannot afford to dawdle on the matter as it will risk losing out on other economic benefits accompanying the RCEP.

“There is a good chance that India will compromise further as otherwise it may lose participating from the economic leg of a mega-Asia trading architecture,” she further opined.

On top of that, prevailing geopolitical tensions between member economies may lead to the continued stifling of progress with regard to RCEP negotiations. China’s inroads into Pakistan as part of it ambitious Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has intensified tensions between the two. Besides that, the South China Sea dispute between China and five other ASEAN members could throw a spanner in the works along the way.

Nevertheless, nations have a tendency to put such issues on the backburner in the promise of greater economic prosperity. Moreover, participating RCEP economies have a point to prove against the current worrying trend of economic protectionism threats of a US-China trade war, and an overall global political mood against free trade. Most of the 16 countries are emerging economies that cannot afford to be left out of the international trade order or risk reversing substantial economic gains garnered thus far.

This time out, the RCEP can also stand to leverage on Singapore’s determined leadership for a conclusion of the trade deal. As chair of ASEAN for 2018, the island nation has included the completion of a high quality RCEP in its list of chairmanship priorities.

As a nation reliant on international trade to flourish, Singapore is in a better position to take the lead on matters. RCEP is often conflated as a Chinese-led initiative but is in fact an ASEAN-led one. It is better understood as an integration of the ASEAN+1 FTAs in order to negate a noodle bowl of conflicting bilateral FTAs in Asia.

Against protectionist undertones and US rescindment of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), RCEP stands as the alternative for ASEAN members which seek to advance the trade liberalisation agenda. As one of the most dynamic regions in the world, Southeast Asia does stand to benefit from such an endeavour in the long run. But whether or not it can stick to its end-2018 deadline will be more apparent come July.

Source: The Asean Post

 

63/ DG Azevêdo welcomes President Macron’s call to strengthen the trading system

Director-General Roberto Azevêdo met with French President Emmanuel Macron in Paris on 30 May, where they discussed the current global trade tensions as well as the central role of the WTO in safeguarding the stability and predictability of the trading system.

At that meeting, President Macron set out his views on the need to strengthen the WTO to ensure that it remains responsive and relevant to members. The Director-General welcomed the President’s call to strengthen the system, and said he was ready to support these efforts and work with President Macron and other leaders to ensure that the multilateral trading system is fit for the global challenges of today.

DG Azevêdo said:

“I warmly welcome the strong support expressed today by President Macron for the WTO and multilateral trading system. It was comforting to hear what he said and I agree entirely with his assessment on the need to strengthen the WTO and to make it more effective in addressing the trade challenges of today. I commend the President for his leadership and stand ready to support him and all WTO members in exploring ways to make the WTO work better for all,”

Source:wto.org

 

64/ DDG Wolff: Trade is a vitally important driver of opportunities for small businesses

Speaking at the Small Business Standards Conference in Brussels on 30 May 2018, Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff emphasised the role micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) have in driving growth and generating jobs. He highlighted the barriers that can prevent MSMEs from participating in international trade and the role of the Technical Barriers to Trade Committee and the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Committee in finding solutions to regulatory differences that impede trading opportunities, particularly for MSMEs. This is what he said:

Introduction

Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) play vital roles in national economies particularly in terms of providing innovation, growth and job creation, more than might be expected from their relatively smaller share of international trade than large multinationals.  Information compiled by the WTO suggests that SMEs provide around two-thirds of total employment in both developing and developed countries. Moreover, SMEs contribute around 35% of GDP in developing countries, and around 50% of GDP in developed countries. Yet exports make up less than 8% of sales of SMEs in developing countries, as compared to 14% of sales of large firms.⁽¹⁾ It’s a similar story in developed countries, large firms export much more than small ones.

SMEs could contribute more to world trade.

One persistent obstacle for SMEs is divergent standards and regulations. Just to give one example, SME textile producers have to deal with different regulations and testing procedures for flammability of clothing in the EU and US.⁽²⁾ The cost burden of double testing can prevent small producers from gaining access to one or the other market, while larger rivals can more easily spread these costs across a larger number of sales. To give another example, a Nepalese SME that exports coffee faces demands from buyers in Japan or Australia for different organic or quality certifications. Because the cost of these different certifications is very high, the SME can’t diversify its export markets.⁽³⁾

A European Commission report (2015) on SMEs and TTIP showed that regulatory issues (SPS (Sanitary and Phyto-sanitary)  and TBT (Technical Barriers to Trade) are the most frequent challenge facing European SMEs when exporting to the United States, representing around 30% of all issues raised by some 869 European companies (responding to an online survey).⁽⁴⁾ The perspective from the other side of the Atlantic is much the same. Standards and regulations are identified by American SMEs as one of main trade barriers for accessing the EU market according to the United States International Trade Commission.⁽⁵⁾  And these are two economies, given their major efforts at providing the public with information and lengthy bilateral relationship, between which one would expect the easiest access. One can assume that the rest of the world is no better.

So what is the problem?

Transparency is not at all as good as it could be, and it hits SMEs especially hard. Overcoming lack of information about requirements and how to comply is a cost that smaller firms find difficult to bear. The unexpected introduction of more stringent regulations can be the final straw for SMEs that are already fighting hard to reach markets against fierce competition, high costs and the capacity of larger rivals to locate, influence and adjust to standards.

Unnecessarily high costs from standards which are unnecessary or unjustified are particularly difficult to swallow. To gain access , foreign manufacturers may need to redesign products specifically for that one market when the required level of health or safety protection is already achieved by its existing products; or when products must undergo duplicative or excessively burdensome inspection, testing or certification procedures.

A recent (2016) ITC (International Trade Centre) study found that a 10% increase in the frequency of regulatory or procedural barriers to trade decreases export revenue of large firms by 1.6%, while for SMEs, export revenues decrease by 3.2%.⁽⁶⁾

These types of barriers can prevent SMEs from expanding their share in international trade, and deprive economies of the multitude of important benefits they provide.

NTMs and standards

Non-tariff measures (NTMs), like regulations and standards, pose a particularly thorny challenge for trade policy.

On one hand, they are essential public policy tools for governments, used to protect vital interests such as health, safety or the environment. On the other hand, they can be particular malignant trade barriers. While a tariff might make a product more expensive, it usually does not completely block access to the market. If you don’t meet standards, you can’t get in the door.

Regulatory barriers are often nebulous, yet very technical, and information about them is at a premium. A small business owner might be able to see the tip of the iceberg from afar, but she likely does not know the extent of what lurks beneath the ocean’s surface.

These barriers don’t just affect a handful of sectors; they infect trade all across the economy. A recent UNCTAD study looking at data from December 2017 covering 109 countries and 90 per cent of global trade, found that TBT measures are the most frequent form of NTMs, affecting 65 per cent of world trade in terms of value, and 35 per cent of product lines.

Yet we can’t live without standards and regulations. They are necessary for compatibly and interoperability in an ever more interconnected world with value chains that are fragmented and geographically dispersed. They are critical tools for addressing shared global challenges in spheres from health to the environment, and living up to our shared commitment to the SDGs. Standards help deliver needed trust and confidence throughout the supply chain. More than that, standards provide incentives to innovate and cooperate, and help disseminate innovations.

The burden stems from divergence. Too many different standards and regulations quickly multiply the costs of international exchange. According to a 2016 OECD report, regulatory differences hit SMEs particularly hard, since they must spread fixed costs of compliance across smaller amounts of revenue.⁽⁷⁾ Internationally agreed standards which provide a common reference point help bring regulations closer. Greater alignment on the basis of international standards eases the burden on SMEs, as they no longer are faced with a need to comply with an array of divergent requirements.

SMEs and standards – challenges and opportunities

The situation of SMEs and standards in global trade today presents a range of challenges and opportunities. I will highlight four areas, and share some ideas.

1. Improving access to information and transparency

Gaining access to information on product requirements imposes costs on firms engaging in trade, and for SMEs this can be a substantial barrier to market entry.⁽⁹⁾

WTO Members are beginning work in this area that holds considerable promise. At the WTO’s 11th Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires in December, 88 countries accounting for 3/4 of world trade laid down foundations for new work on SMEs in the WTO. They formed the Informal Working Group on MSMEs which is discussing and exploring ways to make the multilateral trading system work better for SMEs. Improving transparency and access to information is one focus of this work.  You can contribute.  Member governments can use your guidance as to where you see the problems and how best to solve them.

Another avenue for making a contribution: The TBT and SPS Agreements have well-functioning notification procedures that give members and stakeholders the opportunity to comment on other members’ draft regulations before the enter into force. In 2017 alone, more than 4000 new or changed regulations were notified, which disseminates information about requirements freely accessible to all. The WTO (in cooperation with ITC  and UNDESA (United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs) ) also has an alert system for notifications called ePing, allowing the private sector, and in particular SMEs, to get email alerts on measures that might affect their market access. (http://www.epingalert.org/en/). Nearly 50% of subscribers to ePing are from the private sector, and we have received a lot of positive feedback as to efficiency gains in obtaining access information on notified regulations of interest.  I recommend it to you. In addition, the Global Trade Helpdesk, a joint ITC-UNCTAD-WTO initiative, is another important effort building upon ePing and other mechanisms to improve access to trade-related information for MSMEs, including on TBT and SPS measures.

The WTO has a vibrant set of Committees that enjoy strong private sector input through WTO member delegations. Discussion of specific trade concerns in the TBT and SPS Committees builds on the foundation of the transparency and notification system, to find solutions to regulatory differences that are impeding trade. Usually the interests of larger firms are better represented, but there is no reason the SME voice can’t be heard just as loudly.

Transparency is a mainstay of the normative work of the Committees, building up guidance and best practice through recommendations. The ongoing Eighth Triennial Review of the TBT Agreement, which will conclude in November 2018, will likely culminate in recommendations to improve the notification process and the functioning of enquiry points.

2. Standards makers or takers?

It is important for SMEs to recognize the significance of the standards development process.  SMEs should help formulate standards, not just take them. SMEs need to enhance their voice in the standards development process (both nationally and internationally). You are of course well aware of the constraints you face, such as lack of resources, or knowing what the relevant standard is and assessing its implications. Standardization is a long term investment. But it is absolutely essential to overcome these constraints and make that investment. You should have a seat at the table to ensure the rules of the game – in which you also play a significant part – also address your interests.

International standards bodies have great responsibility to ensure that their standards are relevant and appropriate. The TBT Agreement Code of Good Practice and TBT Committee Six Principles (See Annex) provide important guidance in this respect to ensure transparent, open, coherent, relevant and impartial standards development processes, which take into account concerns of developing members and firms of all sizes. The SME voice is part of ensuring consistency with the spirit of the TBT Committee’s 6 principles (e.g.  transparency for “all interested parties”; and impartiality in standards development process so as not to “favour the interests of particular suppliers”).

Standards bodies should consider how to enhance transparency on their draft standards to give SMEs better opportunities to engage throughout the process of setting and articulating standards. Once standards are published, standards bodies should explore better ways to help SMEs gain access to adopted standards.

The work of SBS is important here, and I encourage you to continue these valuable efforts. International standards bodies can and should better engage with SMEs to ensure they develop globally relevant standards, for all players in the economy.

3. Conformity assessment

Conformity assessment creates significant barriers for SMEs. While all firms face costs from unnecessary differences between markets in respect of testing, certification, audit or inspection procedures, the impact on SMEs is often particularly burdensome.

A recent survey of EU exporters conducted by the ITC found that conformity assessment producers is first (accounting for 32%) among the types of problems faced in connection with what were termed “burdensome” regulations.⁽¹⁰⁾

Similarly, in a European Commission report on SME access to the U.S. market, conformity assessment was highlighted as a particularly problematic barrier by EU SMEs for pharmaceuticals; chemicals ; textiles, wearing apparel and leather products; and machinery, electrical, electronic and other transport equipment.⁽¹¹⁾

A key piece of the puzzle is access to quality infrastructure, including conformity assessment, standardization and metrology.  This is a persistent challenge for developing and least-developed countries. Without access to adequate quality infrastructure, SMEs and other enterprises cannot engage successfully in trade.

Finding better ways to ease the burden of conformity assessment on SMEs is a priority. Duplicative or overly burdensome testing and certification requirements might be a frustration for multinationals, for SMEs it can be an insurmountable wall.

It is important to explore regulatory models that can lower the burden of conformity assessment on SMEs, without compromising health and safety protection. I am aware in the EU that there are some efforts to lower procedural burdens on SMEs of compliance,⁽¹²⁾ I would encourage more research to identify other ways to help reduce conformity assessment burdens on SMEs.

The WTO Secretariat has engaged with international organization such as UNIDO (United Nations Industrial Development Organization) on how such issues can be addressed for instance in quality infrastructure policies.

4. Electronic commerce

MSMEs are going to account for an increasing share of world trade in the soaring area of electronic commerce.  WTO Members  are further exploring  the issue of e-commerce. At our Buenos Aires Ministerial meeting, 71 WTO Members representing about three-quarters of world trade (77%) and world output (GDP) “committed themselves to a program of exploratory work which they expect will lead to negotiations” on electronic commerce.

Electronic commerce is helping to break down barriers to low SME participation in international trade. Reports from eBay found that around 97 per cent of internet-enabled small businesses export, while export participation rates for traditional SMEs range between 2 per cent and 28 per cent in most countries.⁽¹³⁾

Electronic commerce creates many new opportunities for SMEs to gain access to global markets, but not without challenges.

To reach its full potential, it is necessary to gain the trust and confidence of consumers and regulators. As electronic commerce grows, regulators may seek new or additional ways to ensure that products bought online are safe and comply with relevant standards and regulations.  The burden of new regulatory solutions can be expected to fall more heavily on SMEs. It will be worth considering how the SME community can spark ideas, and avoid potential regulatory risk down the line (e.g. in addressing fraud, public controversies etc.). I encourage you to think of innovative ways to deliver confidence and assurance in products traded through ecommerce channels. Here new technologies could play a role (e.g. use of the blockchain to trace the supply chain of a product and pinpoint a source of risk). You of course will have better ideas.

conclusion

Your support is indispensable for the work of the WTO of particular relevance to your interests.

The WTO welcomes your increasing your engagement in our work through your governments and in the WTO’s interactions with the private sector. Use the transparency mechanisms and tools that are available. When you face problems, work with your trade officials to submit comments on drafts regulations, or raise concerns in WTO Committees. Talk to your trade officials about the importance of WTO agreements and how they should be improved.  Tell them what initiatives you would like to see at the WTO to further your interests.

Trade is a vitally important driver of opportunities for SMEs, and provides benefits across economies. Winds of change in trade can have a disproportionate impact on SMEs, and this creates challenges as well as opportunities. Working with and through the multilateral system is an essential path through which to manage and overcome challenges you may face, as well as taking advantage of the opportunities.

We at the WTO look forward to helping to deliver on the promise of international trade.

Source:wto.org

 

65/ WTO to hold seminar on cross-border movement of service-providing individuals

At a meeting of the Council for Trade in Services (CTS) on 30 May, WTO members agreed to hold a thematic seminar on the temporary movement of natural persons across borders for the purpose of supplying services. Also known as “Mode 4”, this trade modality covers individuals who are either service suppliers (such as independent professionals) or are employed by a service supplier.

Under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), services can be traded internationally in four different ways — known as the four modes. Mode 4 does not concern persons seeking access to the employment market in the host member, nor does it affect measures regarding citizenship, residence or employment on a permanent basis.

Initially proposed by India, the seminar will be held back-to-back with a meeting of the Council for Trade in Services on a date still to be confirmed. The event will be based on a draft programme by the WTO Secretariat and will be opened to representatives of WTO members, international organizations, public and private entities and individual experts.

Under the title “CTS Thematic Seminar – Mode 4 at work”, the proposed programme will provide an overview of Mode 4 of the GATS and discuss its scope, offering also a snapshot of the specific commitments undertaken and most favoured nation exemptions listed by WTO members. Mode 4 access and pertinent regulatory disciplines negotiated in Regional Trade Agreements, the main challenges of measuring Mode 4 trade and its economic impact will also feature in the discussion.

Participants will have the opportunity to discuss regulatory measures that may have a bearing on scheduled Mode 4 commitments and will address the challenges to realising the benefits of existing Mode 4 bindings.

On other issues, least developed countries (LDCs) stressed the need for capacity building and technical assistance measures to enable their suppliers to take advantage of the LDC services waiver preferences. They also advocated that, in line with the decision on the waiver taken at the WTO’s 10th Ministerial Conference in Nairobi, the Council facilitate an exchange of information on relevant technical assistance measures, initiate a process to review the operation of notified preferences, and put forward a number of specific suggestions.

China reported on a two-week workshop on “E-commerce and development under the multilateral trading system” that was held in China in May and attended by 15 WTO developing members. Members reverted to a proposal that the Council hold a thematic seminar on e-commerce; delegations were generally supportive of the idea and consultations on a possible programme for the event will be organised.

The Russian Federation and Ukraine reiterated their differences regarding the reform of the Ukrainian gas transportation system and, under other business, Japan, echoed by the United States, repeated its concerns about existing and proposed cybersecurity measures by China and Viet Nam; the delegations concerned underscored that their respective measures are fully in compliance with their WTO obligations.

The Council appointed Ambassador Alfredo Suescum of Panama as the new chair of the Council.

Source:wto.org

 

66/ Symposium highlights role of Trade Facilitation Agreement in easing global flow of goods

A joint G20-OECD-WTO event held on 30 May 2018 at the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in Paris discussed how the international community can join efforts to further ease the flow of goods among WTO members. The WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA) was cited as a model for future trade cooperation initiatives aiming to promote productivity and economic development.

The panel said WTO members have made encouraging progress in implementing the TFA. This is evident through the high number of ratifications of the Agreement by members and the notifications submitted by developing countries outlining the timetables envisaged for implementing the TFA, based on their respective capacities. The panel noted that 136 WTO members have ratified the Agreement, representing 83% of the membership. “The progress made is encouraging and it is heartening to see that WTO members seem keen to implement the TFA to support economic growth and poverty alleviation,” said Nora Neufeld, Secretary to the WTO Committee on Trade Facilitation, speaking at the event. More detail on TFA implementation is available here.

The TFA establishes procedures to ease world trade among WTO members. It is estimated that when fully implemented, the TFA will reduce trade costs by an average of 14% worldwide, with the poorest countries benefitting the most.

The event highlighted that cooperation among international organizations, including the G20, the OECD and the WTO, will be key to monitoring progress among countries in implementing the TFA and identifying areas which could be improved. It was suggested that further progress to ease international trade will be contingent upon enhanced cooperation with the private sector and improved coordination of border agencies. It was also mentioned that the international community has a key role to play in helping women overcome barriers to doing business, as many small and medium-sized enterprises are women-owned.

In his opening speech at the event, OECD Secretary-General Angel Gurría called on international organizations to pool their expertise into this project. He said: “International trade can contribute to more inclusive and sustainable growth. And trade facilitation is a key part of this effort. The TFA shows that multilateralism can work, and the Trade Facilitation Indicators show that it is working. Let’s put our minds together to make global trade work for all. Getting this equation right is crucial to deactivate protectionism, improve productivity and reduce inequalities.”

Other speakers included Argentina’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Jorge Faurie, the B20 Chair, Daniel Funes de Rioja, and the WTO Director-General’s Principal Advisor, Tim Yeend.

Source:wto.org

 

Ngày 31/5

67/ WTO issues 2018 Annual Report

The WTO’s Annual Report, published today (31 May), provides a comprehensive account of the organization’s activities in 2017 and early 2018. The Report opens with a message from Director-General Roberto Azevêdo and a brief overview of the year. This is followed by more in-depth accounts of the WTO’s various areas of activity over the past 12 months. The Report also includes “spotlights” highlighting major WTO events and activities, including the 11th WTO Ministerial Conference held in Buenos Aires.

“Trade growth in 2017 was the strongest since 2011. With continued robust growth forecast for this year and next, we are seeing trade playing its part in supporting the global economic recovery – supporting GDP growth, development and job creation around the world,” says DG Azevêdo in his opening message. “If we are to avoid this strong performance being compromised by a further escalation in tensions, we must seek to further enhance global cooperation.”

“I believe that the multilateral trading system can continue to be a force for good in the world – promoting stability, creating opportunities, and boosting growth and development, as it has done for many years. But we can take nothing for granted,” he continues.

“For all of this to happen, we need to continue strengthening the WTO, fostering cooperation on global economic issues and making the case for the rules-based system. I will continue working together with all WTO members to that end.”

The Report is available as a printed publication and can be freely downloaded. The French and Spanish editions will be published within the next two weeks.

The Report will also be made available as an app via the App Store and Google Play.

Source:wto.org

 

68/ Azevêdo challenges ministers to raise voices in support of trading system

Speaking at an informal ministerial meeting on 31 May in the margins of the OECD meetings in Paris, Director-General Roberto Azevêdo argued that the WTO is essential in resolving growing trade tensions, as it has done on previous occasions, but that this requires members’ active support for the system itself.

The meeting was attended by ministers and representatives from around 30 WTO members, including developed, developing and least-developed members. It was organized by Australia and chaired by Australia’s Minister Steven Ciobo. The focus of the meeting was how to build greater resilience in the trading system, while also advancing negotiations.

DG Azevêdo said:

“The rising trade tensions and the risk of escalation are of very real concern. It is positive that Members are talking to each other and taking up their concerns at the WTO. The system was built to resolve these problems in a way that prevents further escalation. We have done so very successfully on many previous occasions – and we stand ready to play this role once again.

“In 2008 the WTO was tested by the biggest economic crisis the world had seen for almost 80 years. It didn’t just weather the storm – it did the job it was created to do in preventing a rush to protectionism. We saw then the resilience of the system, and its fundamental value to the global economy. But this should not lead us towards complacency.

“The system will only remain resilient and functional to the extent that its members want it to. You have to use the system, work to improve it and raise your voices in its defence. I think this was the sentiment behind the comments we heard from President Macron yesterday.  I agree entirely with his assessment on the need to strengthen the WTO and to make it more effective in addressing the trade challenges of today. The way forward on this is in the hands of WTO members, and I stand ready to support you where I can.”

The Director-General also raised the systemic importance of the WTO’s dispute settlement function and urged ministers to redouble their efforts to resolve the blockage in appointments to the Appellate Body.

Regarding the question of how to advance negotiations in the WTO, DG Azevêdo stressed the need for flexibility. He cited the success of flexible approaches, such as the Trade Facilitation Agreement, and the range of different approaches for which the system allows.

Source:wto.org

 

69/ Azevêdo: “The stability of the trading system is fundamental to our economic wellbeing”

Speaking at an OECD Ministerial Council meeting on 31 May, Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said the multilateral trading system provides a stable and predictable business environment that helps to drive economic growth. He underlined the need to defend this stability but also to strengthen and safeguard the system so that it remains responsive and relevant to WTO members and helps governments and businesses meet the demands of a rapidly evolving global economy.

Ministers,

Excellencies,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Good afternoon.

Low trade growth has been a persistent feature of our discussions at these meetings in recent years. However, since we last met, a different picture has emerged.

In 2017, trade expanded at its fastest annual pace in six years, with merchandise trade growing 4.7% by volume. Export growth was robust in every region of the world – showing the kind of synchronized growth that we haven’t seen in a decade. Commercial services exports rose by 7.4%, measuring by value.

The forecasts for this year and next suggest that strong growth will continue. It seems that trade is once again playing its full role in economic growth and recovery.

Let’s be clear though, this outlook captures the economic picture – but it does not adequately reflect political risks. Forecasts could be easily jeopardized if major trading partners pursue a series of trade-restrictive actions.

The issues behind the rising trade tensions are being discussed in the WTO. New disputes are being brought, which is a proper way of addressing differences in trade relations. And I am talking to all sides to try to resolve this situation. Bilateral contacts are also vital in finding ways forward. These conversations are taking place.

Indeed, yesterday we heard an extremely positive and helpful contribution from President Macron to this discussion. It was comforting to hear the President’s strong words of support for the WTO. This is exactly the kind of political leadership that we need. I agree entirely with his assessment on the need to strengthen the WTO and to make it more effective in addressing the trade challenges of today. As I said to the President when I met him yesterday, I stand ready to support these efforts to explore ways to make the WTO work better for all.

And I don’t think we have a lot of time to spare in seeking to move such a discussion forward.

As yet, most of the current trade-restrictive rhetoric has not translated into action. But this may start to change soon. Besides, the rhetoric itself can be damaging – and we are seeing a few early warning signs. For example, the forward-looking export orders index has dropped sharply since January.

We have to avoid a potential escalation. The predominant effect here would be disruption. And the interconnected nature of the global economy would act as a multiplier of this disruption.

Nearly two-thirds of goods traded today are connected to global value chains. In this context, shocks to the trading system are likely to be globalised.

If we want to see trade helping to drive growth and recovery, then we should not venture further down this dangerous path. And we need to properly prize and defend the stability that has been the pursuit of the multilateral trading system since World War Two.

The system offers a stable and predictable business environment.

Due to this stability, companies can plan their investments with a degree of certainty. They know what the rules are and they can forecast their costs based on stable tariffs.

Of course, there is a degree of flexibility here. In many cases, applied tariffs are below bound rates, so governments have room to move should they wish. Nonetheless, the fact that we have bindings is a source of certainty. Studies show that the current system of bindings has boosted global trade by up to 30%, compared to a world without tariff limits.

We all rely on this stability.

So the health of global trade should be a core element of economic planning. It should be on every finance minister’s mind. Goods and services together represent 28% of global GDP. The stability of the trading system is fundamental to our economic wellbeing. Yet, it is simply taken for granted.

So we need to strengthen and safeguard the system.

As the title of this session suggests, we need to work towards renewing multilateralism.

This applies in many areas, but certainly it applies to trade.

In some ways you could say that the shake up in the global trade debate has been positive. People are talking about these issues again. They are testing old certainties, revisiting assumptions, and questioning how rules and institutions can be improved.

And we should look at the broader picture. The story of trade today is that:

• First, there are many more important players in the game.
• Second, economic models have evolved since the GATT/WTO system was created.
• Third, in many places the debate is quite emotionally charged.

We are seeing new trade initiatives being pursued around the world.

In recent months, we’ve seen deals on the African Continental Free Trade Area, the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, and others too. All of which build on the rules of the WTO.

Indeed, the WTO itself has delivered a run of important agreements in recent years, such as:

• the Trade Facilitation Agreement,
• the agreement to eliminate agricultural export subsidies, and
• the expansion of the Information Technology Agreement.

So we need to see the whole picture when we talk about trade – and we need to move this discussion into the 21st century.

Services rarely feature in the popular debate – yet of course the sector has huge economic importance, including in the job market. According to ILO estimates, the global number of services jobs has increased by an average of 3 per cent each year between 2000 and 2016.

At the same time, we must listen to workers in sectors where jobs are being lost – particularly in manufacturing and in agriculture.

The majority of these jobs, around 80%, have been lost due to automation and new technologies, rather than trade. These are structural changes and this phenomenon is global – it is not only happening in the advanced economies and it will stay with us for quite some time.

McKinsey research suggests that by 2030 manufacturing jobs will fall by 22% in China and 15% in India. Technology is the force that is driving economic change today. A misdiagnosis of this situation could lead us to choke off global trade, which would only bring greater harm.

We are entering a new economic era. This demands a response of similar magnitude. It demands new thinking.

Governments will need to look afresh at how they support and train their workers to equip them for this brave new world. The private sector also has a role to play here – for example, with on the job training schemes.

International institutions which underpin multilateralism and the global economy will also have to evolve – and that includes the WTO.

Our members are aware of this. There has been a wave of creativity on a number of different fronts in recent years.

The WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement is a case in point. It succeeded because members were willing to do things differently and pursue a more flexible framework for that agreement.

Of course our members are intensely discussing how to make progress in the traditional areas of negotiations.

But groups of members have also begun conversations in a number of new areas, which relate to the economic changes I mentioned, including on:

• electronic commerce,
• investment facilitation,
• steps to help smaller businesses to trade, and
• how trade connects to the economic empowerment of women.

We need to ensure that the multilateral trading system remains responsive and relevant to members – and that it helps governments and businesses meet the demands of a rapidly evolving global economy.

This requires renewing and strengthening multilateralism across the board. I look forward to working with all to that end.

Source:wto.org

 

Ngày 01/6

70/ Russia to end its WTO-incompatible auto investment programmes on 1 July 2018

Speaking at a meeting of the Committee on Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs) on 1 June, Russia informed WTO members that it will terminate its WTO-inconsistent auto investment programmes as of 1 July 2018, a deadline stipulated by its WTO accession protocols. These investment programmes allowed auto investors to import auto parts free of duty on condition of local content requirements (LCR). The European Union had held a consultation meeting with Russia on this matter and it welcomed Russia’s move in honouring its commitment to the WTO.

WTO members continued to examine some longstanding LCR measures and their implications in terms of WTO rules.

Indonesia’s LCR policies remained high on the agenda as members called for meaningful actions to be taken by Indonesia to stop its alleged measures across a wide array of sectors. The United States observed that Indonesia’s LCR measures have expanded into renewable energies and internet connectivity.

China’s draft implementation measures for its new Cybersecurity Law once again drew close scrutiny from the United States and the European Union.

Members also discussed other LCR practices in Nigeria, Russia, Argentina and Turkey which, according to proponents, were inconsistent with the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (GATT) and the TRIMs Agreements.

The Committee elected Ms Carrie Wu from Chinese Taipei as the new chair. The next TRIMS meeting is scheduled for 18 October 2018.

China – local content in cybersecurity measures

The United States reiterated its concerns about China’s measures that require the use of local products in the insurance sector, according to the draft regulation on Insurance System Informatization published by the Chinese Insurance Regulation Commission. The US believes that provisions regarding “secure and controllable” requirements in this regulation and other draft implementation measures of the one-year-old Cybersecurity Law are part of China’s efforts to push for more use of Chinese domestic products in information and communications technology (ICT) and other sectors. The US asked China to refrain from issuing or implementing final measures until such concerns are addressed.

The European Union, Canada, Japan and Australia shared the US concerns. They were particularly interested in seeking a clearer definition of “secure and controllable” requirements and having more information on its implementation status. They claimed that these requirements may lead to trade-restrictive effects and are inconsistent with Article 2 of the TRIMS Agreement.

China declared that the purpose of drafting the measure on Insurance System Informatization was to guarantee the security of information in the insurance industry. China said its drafting process was open and transparent, and fully fulfilled the transparency requirements of the WTO. According to China, bilateral exchange had taken place between China and other members and it will continue to exchange views with WTO members and relevant stakeholders.

The United States appreciated China’s bilateral efforts while at the same time highlighting the importance of the committee’s work, and encouraged China’s full engagement in this committee. The US also asked China to submit its replies in written form.

Indonesia – local content requirements

Six items on the meeting agenda concerned Indonesia’s specific LCR policies. These items were placed on the agenda by the United States, the European Union, Japan, Canada, Australia and Chinese Taipei. Korea also expressed its specific concerns at the meeting.

The United States began with an overarching comment on Indonesia’s “pervasive” use of restrictive measures that favour domestic products against imported products. The US stated that Indonesia’s protective measures had expanded into new sectors, such as renewable energy, the internet  and the information industry. The US emphasized that, despite the  repeated calls from the United States for engagement in various WTO fora, including the Agriculture Committee, the Import Licensing Committee and the Goods Council, little effort had been made on Indonesia’s side to change its policies.

The European Union, Japan and the United States referred to Indonesian Ministry of Industry’s Regulation No. 65 of 2016 which they believed required local content for 4G LTE mobile devices and base stations. They claimed that such requirements were discriminatory and violated Article III.4 of the GATT and Article 2 of the TRIMs Agreement. Members urged Indonesia to eliminate these LCR measures in digital hardware and software and update any LCR policies in new areas.

Indonesia pointed out that these regulations are still in the drafting process and it is open to domestic and international investors in its telecommunication sectors without discrimination. Indonesia believes that these regulations are consistent with WTO rules.

With respect to certain local content provisions in the energy sector (mining, oil and gas), Japan, the European Union and the United States reiterated their concerns about export restrictions, investment restrictions and local content requirements. Japan remained concerned that the export restriction measures in Indonesia’s Mining Law may violate Article XI of the GATT. The US, the EU, Canada and Australia were of the view that Indonesia had extended its LCR approach into renewable energy sectors. In particular, the US stressed that “prioritizing” domestic content as stipulated in Indonesia’s regulations actually means “requiring” domestic content, which may be inconsistent with TRIMs obligations.

Indonesia indicated that there was no obligation to prioritize the use of domestic over foreign goods and services in the energy sector. Utilizing products is based on standards, pricing and availability of products. Firms can import foreign products if the required products are not available in the domestic market. And it is not mandatory to use domestic products. There were no export prohibitions as long as the materials met the purification levels as required in Regulation 5/2017. The amendments to the Mineral, Coal, Oil, and Gas Law are still under consideration in the Parliament, but Indonesia  was taking into consideration the trade concerns raised by WTO members.

In response, the United States suggested members contemplate Indonesia’s contradictory comments on gas and oil: firstly, it said there were no requirement on the use of local content, then it said that imports can happen only when local products are not available.

Regarding industrial law and trade law, several members reiterated their general concerns about some LCR provisions and urged Indonesia to inform members about the implementation of these laws.

Indonesia responded that the two laws were developed to support job creation, improvement of competitiveness, and increasing production capacity. They were adopted to address Indonesia’s development challenges and to support the development of its national economy, while respecting Indonesia’s WTO commitments.

Regarding Indonesia’s minimum local product requirement for the retail sector, the European Union, Japan and some other members reiterated their concerns about the 80% LCR imposed by Regulation 70/2013. They asked Indonesia to keep members updated of such regulations and to ensure compliance with the TRIMs Agreement.

Indonesia informed the committee that the regulation is still being discussed and no consensus had yet been reached.

As for certain measures addressing local content in investment in the telecommunications sector, Japan raised the concerns that Indonesia’s amendments to its LCR policy in the telecommunications sector may breach WTO rules, and asked Indonesia to provide an English translation of new amendments and related regulations. The United States highlighted its concerns that Indonesia had expanded LCRs to other sectors.

Indonesia informed members that Ministerial Decree 38/2007, concerning the Universal Service Obligation/USO, had been revoked and amended by Ministerial Decree 25/2015. The new decree did not include LCR. Indonesia will provide an English translation of the new regulation soon.

Regarding local content requirements for dairy importation and distribution, the United States expressed its deep concern about Indonesia’s Ministry of Agriculture Regulation 26/2017 concerning milk supply and circulation. The US suggested that the measure required investors intending to import and distribute dairy products to form partnerships with local producers and to purchase local fresh milk. The European Union, Japan and New Zealand expressed shared concerns.

Indonesia stated that the Ministry of Agriculture’s regulation has several mechanisms with a view to improving the welfare of local farmers, which only apply to fresh milk and does not disrupt trade. It is a partnership programme to help small scale farmers, said Indonesia.

Nigeria – guidelines on Nigerian content in information and communications technology (ICT)

The United States reiterated its concerns about the increasing use of local content measures in Nigeria in energy and ICT sectors, and in particular flagged the confusion stemming from its “Guidelines for Nigerian Content Development in Information and Communications Technology” issued in 2013 by Nigeria’s National Information Technology Development Agency. Having received no response since the previous committee meeting, the US asked Nigeria again to clarify a number of descriptions of specific provisions and incentives mentioned in the Guidelines.

Nigeria believed that the Guidelines were consistent with its obligations in the WTO. Foreign investors can have full ownership in ICT sectors according to the Nigerian schedules of concessions in the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). Nigeria stated that there was no confusion and some issues had been discussed bilaterally. It said it is working on the responses and committed to cooperating with members.

Russian Federation – measures implementing Russia’s import substitution policy

The European Union reiterated its concerns about Decree 223-FZ that required Russian state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and other entities to source domestic goods and services as well as the new initiative of Decree 925 which introduced a 15% price preference for goods of Russian origin and services provided by Russian suppliers. The United States and the EU shared the view that Russia’s import substitution policies are violating the spirit and letter of the TRIMS Agreement. Both requested Russia’s further response to these concerns.

The Russian Federation stated that the policy item, which has been on the committee’s agenda since 2016, was not aimed at squeezing foreign products out of the Russian market but at strengthening the competitiveness and increasing the overall reputation of Russian products. Russia pointed out that Decree 925 did not violate WTO rules as the GATT does not prevent members from giving priority to local goods in public procurement for governmental purposes. Russia also clarified that the purpose of the federal board established by Decree 223 is to galvanize coordination on public procurement, not to purchase Russian products. The purpose of this federal agency is to ensure full satisfaction of the needs of purchasers, focused on quality, availability and time of delivery of goods.

Argentina – auto parts industry

Mexico reiterated its concerns about Argentina’s Act 27,263 on the Regime for the Development and Strengthening of the Argentine Auto Parts Industry, which entered into force on 2 August 2016. Mexico believed that this Act granted fiscal support to auto parts producers who comply with specific minimum local content requirements. This support could violate the TRIMS Agreement. Mexico was not satisfied with Argentina’s replies and asked Argentina to respond to recent questions.

The European Union regretted that Act 27,263 remained in operation in spite of members’ widespread belief that Argentina has violated Article 2 of the TRIMS Agreement. The EU called on Argentina to review this legislation, which is discriminatory against imported car parts. The United States and Korea expressed their interest in monitoring the issue.

Argentina stated that all regulations related to auto industries are compatible with WTO rules. Act 27,263 provisions makes no distinction between domestic and foreign investors when determining eligibility to enrol in and benefit from the regime, said Argentina. It pointed out that, to date, five companies from Japan, Italy, France and the United States were enrolled in the regime.

Mexico reiterated that Argentina’s effort to strengthen its car industry and integrate it into global value chains should be done within the WTO rules and in a non-discriminatory manner.

Turkey – localisation policy in the pharmaceuticals sector

The policy at issue, in the European Union’s view, obliges producers of pharmaceutical products to submit localisation plans to shift production to Turkey or to produce locally via a Turkish manufacturer. When failing to do so or submitting plans deemed insufficient, the respective pharmaceutical products were delisted from the reimbursement list of the Turkish Social Security Institute (SGK), which accounts for approximately 90% of total sales of pharmaceutical products in Turkey.

The EU disagreed with Turkey’s claim that the measure would fall within the public procurement exemption of GATT Article III:8. The EU acknowledged direct purchases of pharmaceutical products by hospitals could indeed be considered as public procurement, but it did not consider the overall reimbursement scheme as public procurement because the social security authority was not directly involved in the purchases and patients contribute partially to the cost of pharmaceutical drugs. The EU asked Turkey to stop this localization policy without delay.

The United States, Canada and Switzerland echoed the EU’s concerns.

Turkey replied that the list of reimbursed medicines is under the authority of the Social Security Institute in Turkey which is a public agency responsible for taking decisions on the listing and modification of payment conditions. Turkey stated that this reimbursement scheme falls within the public procurement exception under Article III:8 of the GATT. Turkey did not apply any licensing policies impeding imports of foreign medicines. It agreed to study further the concerns expressed by members.

The United States and the European Union hoped that the issue will be fully addressed by Turkey so that it will no longer appear in the agenda.

Other business

Russia’s auto investment programmes were taken up as “Other Business” upon the request of the European Union. On its accession to the WTO, Russia was allowed to maintain some LCR in its auto investment programmes until 1 July 2018. Since 2016 June, Russia has started its consultation process regarding this issue and has received queries from the EU. The two sides held a consultation meeting on 31 May. Russia announced that it will remove these programme on the due date and raise the preferential tariff rates on auto components up to its bound tariff rates in order to fully comply with WTO rules.

Source:wto.org

 

71/ EcoServices’ flight to eco-friendly skies

One of the key challenges for the aviation industry over the coming years is how to continue delivering safe, reliable, efficient and cost-effective air travel as well as being environmentally responsible and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Keith Root, Environmental, Health & Safety Manager at EcoPower, explains how ISO standards – ISO 50001 and ISO 14064-3 – are helping to provide a solution.

It all comes out in the wash. And unfortunately for the environment, this is exactly what used to happen with the washing of jet engines when compressor cleaning spilled wash water containing minerals, metals, oils and other contaminants on to the ground.

EcoServices is one company that is helping to make a difference by not only investing in new technology, but also by taking coordinated action to implement new operating procedures, as EcoPower’s Keith Root explains.

ISOfocus: With an ever-growing list of climate change concerns, how is EcoServices managing and reducing its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions?

Keith Root: EcoServices is renowned for its EcoPower service, a patented, closed-loop, engine-wash system that uses pure, atomized and de-ionized water to wash engines for optimum efficiency. With no chemicals, spills or engine-wash effluent escaping into the groundwater, EcoPower provides an environmentally safe and fuel-efficient option for operators. It also collects wastewater, filters it and reuses it for the next wash. So it is not only better for the environment but also means longer maintenance intervals and slower turbine deterioration.

Another significant approach to reducing GHG emissions is through our voluntary compliance (verified by NSF International) with ISO 50001 on energy management. As set out in its remit, ISO 50001 helps EcoServices to improve and update our energy performance continuously, as well as systematically. EcoServices has low-energy demands in the performance of our jet engine wash services, but compliance with ISO 50001 helps us to ensure that we utilize energy most efficiently, thereby controlling GHG emissions.

How is GHG verification undertaken at EcoServices? Is the verification of a GHG statement conducted by an independent third party or by EcoServices internal auditors?

EcoServices is about to partner with NSF International to verify GHG emissions. NSF is an accredited, independent third-party certification body that tests and certifies products to verify that they meet public health and safety standards. It has over 70 years’ experience in conducting such audits, claiming “unmatched technical GHG expertise”. It says: “NSF’s climate programme was developed and is run by industry experts who possess the most up-to-date and accurate information to use in client reporting. We provide a dedicated client manager throughout the verification process to ensure prompt, accessible and appropriate communication.”

How does ISO 14064-3¹⁾ ensure that the EcoServices inventory of emissions is undertaken accurately and completely?

Compliance with ISO 50001 guarantees that EcoServices is controlling energy consumption to maximize efficiency; and ISO 14064-3 is essential to ensure that our GHG emissions data is recorded, computed and reported accurately. EcoServices has a global network and whereas ISO 50001 focuses on activity to improve energy efficiency, the ISO 14064 series of standards concentrates on the report structures to ensure compliance and conformity with the accepted worldwide business community.

What added value does ISO 14064-3 bring EcoServices, such as credibility with stakeholders, greater confidence in the inventories, etc.? Is there any other information you wish to give companies looking to use ISO 14064-3?

ISO 14064 represents best practice for the reduction of GHG emissions along with requirements for their reporting and verification. For EcoServices, it provides credibility with stakeholders to verify complete and accurate accounting for GHG emissions reports. Furthermore, it brings international recognition and compatibility, with a framework and tools that are agreed on and respected internationally.

1) ISO 14064-3:2006, Greenhouse gases – Part 3: Specification with guidance for the validation and verification of greenhouse gas assertions, is currently under revision.

Source:iso.org

 

72/ The secret to unlocking green finance

The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) asserts that ours is the last generation that can stop climate change. We need to do this by changing to a zero-carbon, sustainable, cyclic economy. Yet unlocking the finance for this has been a major challenge… until now. Discover how ISO is at the forefront of this transition, developing several standards that will propel, catalyse and underpin the new sustainable economy.

If there were a top-ten list of environmental risks, then resource depletion, pollution and climate change would be at the top. In fact, these three risks are strongly connected, just as economics and environmental management now form unbreakable linkages for a sustainable economy. The intent is certainly there to make this transition happen. At the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP21) held in Paris in 2015, over 400 major investors representing USD 24 trillion in assets petitioned for a strong, worldwide deal to tackle climate change. Although a deal did emerge from the Conference, financing it is proving a challenge due to the scale of investment needed. It also requires being creative in how we tap into the multitrillion-dollar bonds market that is typically funded by risk-averse financiers.

The magnitude of the investment is unparalleled. UNEP, for example, has determined that by 2030, much of the world’s infrastructure will need to be redeveloped and replaced in the transition toward the new economy. What’s more, according to the New Climate Economy, the flagship project of the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate – an international initiative that examines how countries can balance economic growth with the risks of climate change – this economic and environmental revolution will require funding to the tune of USD 90 trillion.

Focusing on energy alone, the International Energy Agency estimates that the world will need to infuse at least USD 53 trillion in the energy sector by 2035 to prevent dangerous climate change. Meanwhile, on the continent that gave birth to the 2015 Paris climate change deal, the European Commission’s (EC) High-Level Expert Group on Sustainable Finance (HLEG) has calculated that the EC must invest USD 180 billion annually if it is to fulfil Europe’s ambitions in tackling climate change.

Propel and compel

While investment has already begun, significant problems have emerged due to a lack of tools to value natural resources and the absence of a robust, universal standard that at least propels, if not compels, financial institutions to reduce their exposure to climate change risks. For example, investors at the 2015 Paris Conference called for financial institutions to determin – and disclose – such risks. Yet a report by the investment house Boston Common Asset Management, published earlier this year, found this area lacking: amongst the 59 largest banks in the world, less than half were assessing climate change risks, and well over half failed to limit their financing of the coal sector.

There have been other challenges too. Over the past ten years, a new type of investment product has emerged known as the “green bond”. In simple terms, a bond is a loan whereby the lender gets a fixed return for a finite time period, after which the loan is repaid in full. Green bonds provide vital finance for sectors such as renewable energy, low-carbon buildings and transportation, energy efficiency, waste minimization, recycling and the circular economy, sustainable agriculture, and climate change adaptation. At face value, green bonds are a win-win: investors make money funding developments for a better world whilst developers receive the lifeblood for fledgling environmental projects and programmes.

Green bond beginnings

The World Bank coined the term “green bond” in 2008 when it launched its Strategic Framework for Development and Climate Change, conjuring an eco-label for a new breed of loan to finance projects and programmes in sustainable development. Since then, the green bonds market has grown substantially and, according to the Climate Bonds Initiative, an international organization working to mobilize the bond market for climate change solutions, financial institutions issued about USD 155.5 billion in green bonds during 2017. Yet, despite these efforts, green bonds currently make up less than half a percent of the global bonds market.

As with many innovations, there have been controversies, such as the bond “labelled as green” whose intended purpose was to fund incremental improvements in the operational efficiency of an oil refinery. Furthermore, varying definitions for a green bond and new schemes for assurance have been confounding and off-putting. “Different definitions for green bonds have confused and deterred investors,” comments Dr John Shideler, Chair of technical committee ISO/TC 207, Environmental management, subcommittee SC 4, Environmental performance evaluation, who has been active in the field of climate change mitigation for more than a dozen years.

“Issuers have been able to choose from different frameworks for substantiating their green bond claims, such as the Green Bond Principles, the Climate Bonds Standard, and the guidelines of the People’s Bank of China. However, the lack of uniform eligibility rules and varying definitions of “green” have been seen to restrain growth in the sector,” he deplores. Fortunately, the new family of ISO standards, including ISO 14030, Green bonds – Environmental performance of nominated projects and assets, will significantly help to allay such problems.

Setting the framework

For decades, standards have provided the keys for unlocking beneficial change, as well as the structure to support such change. Environmental management is a case in point. For instance, ISO 14001 for environmental management systems was instrumental in helping a food company recycle its waste. Numerous organizations have likewise reported enormous annual savings in energy thanks to ISO 50001’s energy management systems. Furthermore, the returns on costs invested were typically achieved in well under a year.

Building on these successes, ISO is developing the next generation of environmental management standards, which will focus in particular on melding economics and environmental management. For example, valuing natural resources and performing environmental cost-benefit analyses are both strategically and tactically important steps in sustainable development programmes.

Accordingly, ISO 14007 will enable organizations to determine and communicate the costs and benefits associated with their environmental aspects, impacts and dependencies on natural resources. ISO 14008, meanwhile, describes a set of tools for assigning monetary values to environmental impacts. “There is a growing drive towards valuing natural capital, as well as a need to undertake a monetary assessment of an organization’s environmental aspects and impacts,” explains Martin Baxter, Chair of ISO/TC 207’s subcommittee SC 1, Environmental management systems. “Therefore, having a set of standardized, harmonized methods becomes important.”

Whilst Baxter sees both standards having a role in addressing climate change risks, tackling these requires finance for adaptation, resilience and the transition to a low-carbon sustainable economy. This is where two other standards – ISO 14097 for the assessment and disclosure of climate-change risks of investments and ISO 14030 for green bonds – will serve a critical role.

Standards set sail

One year after the 2015 Paris Conference, France passed the world’s first law addressing climate-change risk and disclosure. “Article 173 of French Energy Transition Law requires institutional investors to disclose how they address climate-change risks,” explains Stanislas Dupré, Convenor of the working group that is developing ISO 14097, a standard that sets the requirements for reporting climate-related risks and the impact of financial institutions’ climate actions.

Existing standards on the subject are varied and fragmented, indicating a pressing need for a harmonized, unifying and international standard. ISO 14097 will serve that purpose. “There was a clear need for technical guidance and a standardized framework, describing how financial institutions, banks, investors and asset managers can assess climate risks and then disclose them,” adds Dupré.

At the same time, ISO 14030 will achieve equivalent credibility and uniformity for assuring green bonds. By 2015, it was clear that green bonds needed a unifying standard to build on the early foundations provided by the Green Bond Principles, the Climate Bond Standard and the variety of existing taxonomies for green bonds – and so eliminate the risk of multiplying regional standards and fracturing a game-changing market. “It will be the first International Standard for green bonds,” explains Shideler.

So how will ISO 14030 take into account existing standards? The strong suit of ISO is the harmonization of existing standards. Thus, ISO 14030 will draw upon the Green Bond Principles and the Climate Bond Initiative’s Climate Bond Standard, which is based on these principles. The standard’s working group of experts is also considering the taxonomy for green bonds developed through a joint effort of the Green Finance Committee of the China Society for Finance and Banking and the European Investment Bank. These resources and many more are providing seed documents for ISO 14030.

Meanwhile, Europe’s High-Level Expert Group on Sustainable Finance (HLEG) has recommended that the European Commission produce a standard for green bonds developed within the EU. “The HLEG’s recommendations align well with the scope and approach proposed for ISO 14030, whilst the new working group for ISO 14030 includes individuals from the HLEG and experts with experience in developing and using other existing standards,” Shideler remarks.

Benefits across the board

So how will all these standards combine to address climate change? In simple terms, they will allow decision makers to make informed choices in a way which is more likely to be economically and environmentally sustainable. “ISO 14008 can be used by all types and scale of organizations as it provides a standardized approach for natural-capital accounting. ISO 14007, on the other hand, is intended to be used at the organizational level. Therefore, the two standards will complement one another,” explains Baxter.

And what benefits will ISO 14097 bring? “There will be three main benefits,” explains Dupré. “First, it will guide those investing and managing finance to assess climate-related risks. Secondly, it will help drive the shift to a low-carbon economy by lowering the exposure to climate-related risks; and thirdly, ISO 14097 will provide the benefits of standardization. In other words, a unifying framework that provides a basis for assessment, verification and comparability,” he adds. The plan is to publish ISO 14097 in 2020.

ISO 14030 will also deliver three major benefits, Shideler continues: “Firstly, it will dispel any confusion about what constitutes a green bond. Secondly, it will provide a taxonomy of assets and projects that can be financed by green bonds, and thirdly it will provide assurance that green bonds issued in conformity with it will deliver environmental benefits, giving investors confidence.” All going well, ISO 14030 will be published in 2019.

In summary, if economies and trade underpin civilizations, then melding economics with environmental management is critical if we are to live sustainably. Making this transition requires a paradigm shift in the way we value resources and use environmental cost accounting. And if environmental finance is the key that unlocks the capital to drive the changeover, then ISO standards, through harmonization and assurance, will provide the framework, structure and strength to make it happen.

Source:iso.org

 

73/ Big polluters take a stand

The fight against climate change has unexpected allies with some of the heaviest-polluting industries joining its ranks. Why have they chosen to take a stand? And what are they doing to help clear the air?

Society needs them. Aluminum, iron and steel, cement and other energy-intensive industries are vital components of the very infrastructure of our cities and towns. But manufacturing these products takes up a lot of energy because high temperatures are needed to heat up and modify materials. The resulting emissions make up a significant share of global stationary greenhouse gases (GHG).

Some of the key players in the field don’t want to be seen as big polluters anymore. “There is a realization that climate change is important. It’s happening, we have to do something now, tomorrow will be too late,” says Volker Hoenig, Managing Director of VDZ, the German cement association, which operates a cement research institute in Germany and is serving the cement industry worldwide. “The advantage is that these emissions are stationary, that is, they are concentrated in one place. The process is therefore fixed and predictable, which makes it easier to monitor and control.”

The development of a new series of industry-specific ISO standards to measure GHG emissions could shake things up. Talking about this project, Hoenig recounts: “It was time for the industry to take responsibility. The momentum came from the manufacturers themselves. Soon, competitors agreed to work on a consensus and make decisions that would impact their future. You had representatives from the iron and steel, cement, aluminum, lime and ferroalloys industries working together. It was a powerful move.”

Concrete solutions

Cement manufacturing is one of the most energy-intensive processes worldwide. But this product is irreplaceable, as a binder for concrete structures. “That’s why VDZ was one of the key drivers of the initiative to standardize GHG emissions monitoring and reporting,” says Hoenig.

The association is no stranger to standardization, mainly in relation to product quality. But about 15 years ago, VDZ started taking an interest in GHG monitoring and reporting following the introduction of the European Union Emissions Trading System and the development of the WBCSD¹⁾ Cement Sustainability Initiative CO₂ and Energy Protocol. The protocol is now used by nearly a thousand cement plants in the world.

“The standardization of GHG monitoring and reporting for energy-intensive industries began as a European initiative, with VDZ involved at an early stage,” Hoenig continues. After this initial effort, the industry turned to ISO in order to widen the reach of this work. “Climate change is a global problem, so we needed a global solution. It made sense to come to ISO,” he says. “International Standards level the playing field worldwide. That’s important for both the economy and sustainability.”

What’s notable about this story is the willingness demonstrated by industry leaders to be part of the solution. “You are accepting a reality,” says Hoenig, “you are a big polluter, but you can do something about it.”

The work is under way and the result will be published as a series of industry-specific standards under the denomination “ISO 19694”. The suite of standards will be made up of a generic document and several industry-specific parts. “Currently, we have dedicated parts for the iron and steel, cement, aluminum, lime and ferroalloys industries, with two additional ones coming up on semi-conductors and displays,” explains Hoenig. “These ISO standards will offer accurate, up-to-date methodologies representing the best current practice. And because they are international, companies around the world will benefit. The ISO process also makes sure that the standards are regularly revised and updated, so that we always have access to the latest information.”

A tonne for a tonne

Although a monitoring and reporting standard may not sound like a revolutionary step, without it we won’t have accurate and comparable emissions data from some of the biggest polluters in the world. “Up until now, these industries have been measuring their data emissions using different methodologies. That means it’s hard to have an accurate vision of how a company rates compared to others,” explains Marcel Koeleman, Chair of ISO subcommittee ISO/TC 146/SC 1 that develops standards on air quality of stationary source emissions.

This is problematic for various reasons. First, manufacturers can have skewed appreciations of their own impact. “You may be doing better or worse than you think, but you won’t know for sure unless everyone uses the same methodology,” says Koeleman. “It’s not an easy thing to do. Some companies will realize they are not as efficient as they thought, but it’s a necessary step if we want to change things.”

Second, for monitoring organizations like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), it’s difficult to have an accurate view of the actual impact of these industries without harmonized measurements. In turn, this makes it harder to coordinate an adequate response. A standardized methodology could be used both by countries reporting industry emissions and by companies for internal (or external) benchmarking, which will help enforce and improve monitoring done by organizations like the IPCC. And third, without comparable measurements, it’s going to be very difficult to identify best practice, which is key to taking meaningful action on climate change.

“The future standards are therefore one crucial component of a wider response,” says Koeleman. “For the first time, emissions from energy-intensive industries will be comparable, not just from country to country, but also between sectors. It will be possible to benchmark plants worldwide using one common methodology. One tonne of CO₂ emitted by an industrial installation from any of these sectors will equal one tonne of CO₂ all over the world. That’s not the case today due to differences in reporting methods.”

These standards are therefore a crucial first step for a more controlled and clean industry. For example, projects aimed at reducing GHG emissions could be agreed between countries or even companies, using this new harmonized methodology to monitor results. The standards will also facilitate the development of more accurate environmental management policies. Therefore, the impact of ISO 19694 goes beyond being a technical document, affording a broader societal contribution to our fight against climate change.

“You don’t always get industry willingly stepping up to the challenge. That’s what I have been most impressed with in my role as Chair of the committee. We all knew there were economic consequences, and different interests to take into account, but when I asked people around the table whether they were still in favour of developing these standards, everyone agreed.”

A last question remains. ISO already has a collection of environmental standards, including standards to quantify and monitor GHG emissions. So why are these new standards necessary? For Koeleman, the benefit is straightforward. The contribution that energy-intensive industries make to GHG emissions is significant. Developing targeted guidance that takes their specific industry processes into account can substantially increase adoption and use because they will be more adapted and accurate. “An advantage of creating these standards within ISO is that we don’t only benefit from its standards development experience and international outreach, but we can align with the best practice already developed by the environmental management committee ISO/TC 207. In the end, it’s about learning from each other.”

So far, the development of the ISO 19694 series is well under way. In addition to industry representatives, the committee also has environmental professionals, scientists and researchers working on these standards. “But more experts are welcome,” says Koeleman enthusiastically. “If you are in an energy-intensive industry and want your organization to take leading action and have a say when the rules are being developed, then join us! Simply contact your national ISO member body to participate in our committee. More representation will further strengthen our work.” Koeleman is especially keen to encourage members from emerging economies. “One of the advantages of ISO is that consensus is not something limited to the meeting room; the goal is to achieve consensus at a global scale.”

1) The World Business Council for Sustainable Development is a global CEO-led organization of over 200 leading businesses working together to accelerate the transition to a sustainable world.

Source:iso.org

 

74/ Building standards for the future we want

Despite the international community’s best efforts, extreme weather events and slow-onset climate change continue to wreak havoc on our lives and livelihoods. Adaptation measures, however, will help us prepare for the worst – and new ISO standards are filling a gap by providing a badly needed high-level framework, helping organizations to cope and adapt.

Ever since the first Earth Summit in Rio in 1992, the climate change mitigation race has been on. From summit to summit, governments everywhere were urged to put in place measures to bring greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions down, along with Earth’s temperature.

Solar panel incentive schemes, hydroelectric dams, wind farms, electric transport and recycling campaigns are just some of the ways the world is tackling the issue – and yet, according to The Emissions Gap Report 2017 published by UN Environment, total global GHG emissions continue to rise, although the rate of growth has decreased over the past few years.

Paying the price

We all continue to pay a high penalty, not only in fatalities and injuries from extreme weather events, but also in financial terms, with livelihoods lost, communities destroyed and massive rebuilding required. Last year, for example, was the costliest on record for insurance pay-outs from natural disasters, with the most expensive hurricane season ever known in the United States and devastating floods in South Asia.

Extreme weather, made worse by climate change, along with the health impacts of burning fossil fuels, has cost the US economy at least USD 240 billion a year over the past ten years, according to the report The Economic Case for Climate Action in the United States, published by the Universal Ecological Fund, a non-profit that disseminates scientific data to address climate change.

In the UK, extreme water events, such as droughts or floods, attributed to climate change, have been taking a toll on both communities and business. Anglian Water, the UK’s largest water and water recycling company, can vouch for that. “Over the last 40 years, there have been a number of droughts far worse than anyone had planned for, which had a big impact on our customers in terms of severe water restrictions,” said Christopher Hayton, Anglian Water’s Head of Public Affairs.

“At the same time, flood events are becoming far more difficult to predict, increasing risk, not only for our customers, but also for our own vital assets. These risks are being compounded by the rapid economic and housing growth that is forecast over the next 25 years.”

Urban migration, of course, is not just a challenge for the UK, it is a worldwide issue that will have a huge impact on global resources that are already under strain. Add to that the continued growth in the world’s population – projected to reach 9.7 billion by 2050, according to the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs – and the pressure on our environment is not likely to lift any time soon.

 Taking appropriate action

There is no denying that the world needs to have measures in place to cope with the adverse weather effects this will bring. One important measure is adaptation to climate change, i.e. taking appropriate action now to prevent or minimize damage when disaster hits, helping to save lives and money.

Although adaptation plans are already in place in some countries, more needs to be done, according to Zelina Zaiton Ibrahim, Vice-Chair of ISO’s subcommittee SC 7, Greenhouse gas management and related activities, of technical committee ISO/TC 207, Environmental management.

“Studies published last year have shown a direct link between human causes of climate change and recent extreme weather events experienced,” she said. “Thus, the actions required to mitigate climate change and measures for adaptation must be done hand in hand. Mitigation and adaptation are two sides of the same coin in tackling climate change.”

At the United Nations Climate Change Conference in 2016 (COP22), one year after the Paris Agreement, USD 100 billion were pledged annually until 2020 to help developing countries, some of the worst affected by climate change, to both reduce their emissions and adapt to climate change. Of that, USD 20 billion will be dedicated to adaptation. Then at COP23 in 2017, a number of initiatives were launched to help countries adapt to the realities of climate change. One initiative is to help protect people living in Small Island Developing States from the health impacts of climate change; another is to improve the climate resilience of women in the Sahel region of Africa, between the Sahara and the Sudanian Savanna.

Governments and national authorities are also putting into place national adaptation plans, which often require businesses and industries to submit progress reports regularly. Japan, for example, launched its Climate Change Adaptation Strategy in January 2017 to contribute to the Paris Agreement, with many local governments developing their own adaptation measures to fit.

The Hyogo Prefecture, for instance, located in the Kansai region, whose capital is Kobe, has developed its own Plan for Promotion of Measures against Global Warming, which incorporates the national policies and takes into account the goals, target and action plan of the Climate Change Adaptation Strategy. To engage local residents, the Prefecture also held workshops to establish the true impact of global warming.

Hiroshi Koshio, Director of Hyogo Prefecture’s Global Warming Solutions Division, said: “By better understanding the impacts, we can better consider what adaptation measures individuals or local communities can take. Ultimately, we hope that the results will be incorporated into the future adaptation plan.”

Improving resilience

Adaptation also makes good commercial sense and John Dora, of John Dora Consulting Limited, has a wealth of experience in this area. A consultant to governments, regulators, infrastructure operators and service providers on resilience to weather and climate change, Dora is also the Convenor of one of the working groups of ISO/TC 207/SC 7, involved in developing standards for climate change mitigation and adaptation.

“The disruption of an organization’s infrastructure by extreme weather damages both revenue and reputation,” he said. It can also have an impact on an organization’s duty of care and diligence. “Legally, heads of organizations have a duty of care and diligence and climate change is now seen as a risk that is both capable of causing harm and one that can be foreseen,” he said. “Therefore, directors should be considering the impact of climate change on their business, and failure to do so may bring liability for future losses.”

Anglian Water, for instance, considers this to be essential. It has invested over five billion pounds sterling in the past five years on schemes to build resilience and provide new infrastructure for growth. “We are now in the process of planning for the 2020-2025 period and will be investing even more in critical schemes and programmes to further our resilience to these challenges,” Hayton said. “To put it quite simply, if no action is taken to mitigate and adapt to the impacts of climate change, then it will not be possible to put enough water into the supply to meet the demand,” he added.

Becoming “climate adapted”

For Dora, resilience is key. To be considered resilient and “climate adapted”, organizations must embed the capacity for adaptation into all their functions, he said. They must have an understanding of how current and future weather conditions could affect their organization, and have operational and management strategies in place that enable it to respond, both in the present and over time, to climate challenges.

“Organizations need to have strategies in place to adapt to climate changes, ideally before climate change affects them,” he said. “And all of this needs to be part of ‘business as usual’, with the cost taken into account so that it ultimately only has a marginal impact on financial performance.” Not an easy task… which is why standards can help.

Realizing a vision

A vision and framework are needed to anticipate weather changes and their impacts, and to incorporate these, along with adaptation measures, into an organization’s operations and management strategies. Hence, work is under way on a series of ISO International Standards to do just that.

The future ISO 14090, Adaptation to climate change – Principles, requirements and guidelines, will help organizations of all kinds put in place a structure to help them prepare for changes in weather patterns and implement adaptation measures.

It will be useful to any organization wishing to better understand the vulnerability, impacts and risks to these changes, allowing it to improve its resilience through adapting appropriately. Complementary standard ISO 14091 for vulnerability, impacts and risk assessment and technical specification ISO/TS 14092 for local governments and communities are also in the pipeline.

Filling the gap

Dora believes the standards will fill an important gap. “The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) developed Annotated guidelines for the preparation of national adaptation programmes of action and Technical guidelines for the national adaptation plan process for least-developed countries,” he said. “But there is a gap in that there is no high-level framework for adaptation at, for example, organization or community level to support the guidance. The standards are being designed to help all kinds of organizations, regardless of how far they are in developing an adaptation plan.”

For the Hyogo Prefecture, the standards will make a big difference. “We expect the upcoming adaptation standards to support local governments to contribute to the Paris Agreement and implement effective adaptation measures,” said Koshio.

Anglian Water also expects to benefit, even though its adaptation plans and programmes are already well established. “We await with interest the publication of these standards,” said Hayton, “and feel that international standardization in this area will be a valuable tool to help organizations anticipate and adapt to climate change.”

Source:iso.org

 

75/ Action on climate change in the latest ISOfocus

With climate change now squarely a priority on the public and political agenda, how are International Standards making a difference? Where do we need to go from here? And what do we do to get there?

This latest ISOfocus issue addresses these questions and lays out the range of standards for monitoring climate change, quantifying greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and promoting good practice in environmental management and design. These are just some of the ways in which ISO International Standards help governments and organizations address climate change.

But this can’t happen without collaboration. As Thomas Idermark, CEO of the Swedish Standards Institute (SIS), writes in his introductory remark: “The climate has no borders, and neither has ISO. This is what makes it so important that the work carried out in different committees to identify best practice does not simply continue but also escalates.”

ISO has produced over 600 environment-related standards, including those that help open world markets for clean energy and energy-efficient technologies and support climate change adaptation and mitigation. They also contribute directly to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 13 on climate action.

To help keep you current on developments, the latest ISOfocus brings together compelling views of the benefits of ISO standards on climate change from all points of the globe. Articles span a wide range of topics, including quantifying GHG emissions, climate change mitigation and adaptation frameworks, and financing climate change activities.

We have deeply reported magazine features, supported by comprehensive expertise, topical stories as well as lively debates on how ISO standards help. You will also find useful infographics as well as a climate change case study.

Whether you are a company or a government representative, or just curious about what’s happening in climate change, read the latest ISOfocus to find out more about this major issue that we need to tackle together.

Source:iso.org

 

76/ Data privacy by design: a new standard ensures consumer privacy at every step

On the eve of new EU regulations, and in the wake of recent large-scale data privacy breaches, a new ISO committee is leading the way with guidelines that put the consumer back in control.

The Internet-driven world shook when Facebook was recently exposed for having shared personal information about 87 million users to a private company, the aftershocks of which are still being felt as it becomes clear this is not a one-off event.

As new EU regulations come into force late this month that require companies to protect personal data, restricting the way it is collected and used, ISO is taking the consumer voice one step further. A team of privacy experts has been formed to develop the first set of preventative international guidelines for ensuring consumer privacy is embedded into the design of a product or service, offering protection throughout the whole life cycle.

The new ISO project committee, ISO/PC 317¹⁾, Consumer protection: privacy by design for consumer goods and services, was developed by ISO/COPOLCO, the ISO committee that deals with consumer issues in standardization. Its remit is to develop a standard that will not only enable compliance with regulations, but generate greater consumer trust at a time when it is needed most.

Speaking via video at an ISO international workshop dedicated to the issue, held in Bali, Indonesia, this week, internationally renowned Canadian privacy expert Dr Ann Cavoukian welcomed the move.

“The majority of privacy breaches remain unchallenged, unregulated and unknown,” she said. “Regulatory compliance alone is unsustainable as the sole model for ensuring the future of privacy. Prevention is needed.”

The ISO workshop, held under the theme “Consumer protection in the digital economy”, brought together more than 150 consumer and standardization experts from 34 countries and provided an opportunity for the new committee to share ideas and advance the project. It covered areas such as the impacts of data protection, artificial intelligence, the sharing economy and legislation on the online consumer experience.

Pete Eisenegger, ISO/COPOLCO’s lead person for data protection and privacy and member of ISO/PC 317, said that implementing the standard will help companies comply with regulations and avoid potentially devastating data breaches that erode consumers’ confidence in the digital world.

“It will place the consumer at the centre of the design process,” he said.

“It will allow goods and services providers to address all the life-cycle issues of privacy by design, so that consumers can have greater confidence in their purchases and take back control over the use of their data.

“What’s more, it will also go wider than the new EU regulations for data protection by also addressing cyber security of consumer products for us in our homes, right from the design stage.”

The standard will be of use to those providing digitally connected consumer products, such as home appliances and wearable devices, mobile application developers, online service providers and more.

Learn more about the ISO Committee on consumer policy, ISO/COPOLCO.

Source:iso.org

 

77/ Celebrating constant evolution on World Metrology Day

The SI system of international units of measurement is constantly adapting to the latest technology and scientific discoveries.

World Metrology Day celebrates the coming together of 17 nations on 20 May 1875 to sign “The Metre Convention”. It was an historic day, establishing a framework for global collaboration in the science of measurement and its use in science, business and commerce.

The original aim of the Metre Convention – the worldwide uniformity of measurement –remains as important today, in 2018, as it was in 1875. But scientific developments have made things more complicated; we now measure things that didn’t even exist back then. In fact, more than 50 new elements have been discovered since the Convention was signed, each of them detectable only through the use of sophisticated measuring equipment.

The theme for World Metrology Day 2018 is “Constant evolution of the International System of Units”. This theme was chosen because, in November 2018, the General Conference on Weights and Measures is expected to conclude its review of one of the largest changes to the International System of Units (SI) since its inception. The proposed changes are based on the results of research into new measurement methods that used quantum phenomena as the basis for fundamental standards. The SI would be based on a set of definitions, each linked to the laws of physics, and have the advantage of being able to embrace further improvements in measurement science and technology, meeting the needs of future users for many years to come.

The Convention of 1875 established the International Bureau of Weights and Measures (BIPM), one of the organizations responsible for worldwide uniformity of measurement. The BIPM is the hub of a network of national metrology institutes which continue to realize and disseminate the chain of traceability to the SI into national accredited laboratories and industry. They work together with the International Organization of Legal Metrology (OIML), which was established in 1955 with the primary aim of harmonizing the regulations and metrological controls applied by the national metrological services, or related organizations.

The International Bureau of Weights and Measures (BIPM) and the International Organization of Legal Metrology (OIML), which organize World Metrology Day, actively liaise with a number of ISO technical committees.

Source:iso.org

 

78/ Robots, smart factories now more common in Vietnam

Lavifood, a fruit processing and exporting company, has been using AI to organize a closed value chain, from providing seedlings and fertilizer to processing high-quality farm produce.

Pham Ngoc An, deputy general director of Lavifood, said AI is an efficient tool to control the cultivation process, helping improve the quality of farm produce used as input materials for its modern factory.

At Samsung’s factory in Bac Ninh province, 6,000 robots are working on the assembly line. Vinamilk, the nation’s leading dairy producer, has spent VND2.4 trillion to organize an automatic production line. At its factories, the transportation and sorting of goods are done by robots.

Vinasoy (soybean milk manufacturer), URC (consumer goods), Habeco (brewer) and many other manufacturers all use robots in their production.

Huynh Phong Phu from ABB Company confirmed that the demand for robots is on an upswing in Vietnam. In 2015 and earlier years, ABB could sell 200-300 robots a year, while the figure increased by many times in 2016-2017.

The big spenders

An analyst commented that manufacturers now tend to allocate big budgets on technology.

In the automobile industry, Truong Hai Automobile is known as a big spender on technology. It opened a modern factory recently with investment capital of VND12 trillion.

Huynh Dung Sang from Duhal, a lighting equipment manufacturer, said at a workshop on 4.0 industry revolution recently that the company invested $30 million in the last three years on its two factories in Tien Giang and Ben Tre.

According to Trinh Thanh Nhon, CEO of ICC, a cosmetics company, said the toothpaste production line in his company alone costs VND50 billion. With modern technology, the number of workers has been cut by 2/3, while the output has increased by three times.

To boost sales, the company uses sales management software worth VND4 billion, which has allowed its products to have large coverage at 20,000 shops in cities and provinces throughout the country and has helped sales increase by 20%.

Not only manufacturing companies which run large production lines, but trade and service companies, not only big corporations, but small enterprises have also utilized high technology.

Color Life, a website selling flowers at hoayeuthuong.com, has also been applying technology to run a closed process from order taking, delivery, and accountancy to post-sale service.

Color Life’s founder Pham Hoang Thai Duong said that utilizing modern technology is a must now for everyone. “Only when utilizing technology can I handle hundreds of orders a day,” he said.

Source: VietnamNet

 

79/ EU, Belgium pledge to expedite EVFTA signing with Vietnam

The European Union (EU) desires to move forward the early official signing of the EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (EVFTA) and pledges to help Vietnam improve its capacity to fully and effectively realize the trade pact’s commitments.

This is according to EU representatives speaking at a meeting with Nguyen Van Binh, head of the Communist Party of Vietnam (CPV) Central Committee’s Economic Commission and secretary of the CPV Central Committee, who led a high-ranking Party delegation on a visit to Belgium and the EU.

They extolled Vietnam’s determination and goodwill towards the signing of the trade deal which is of great political and economic importance to both sides.

During the May 30-31 visit to Belgium, Mr Binh met European Commission (EC) Vice-President Jyrki Katainen, Belgian Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Development Cooperation, Alexander De Croo, former Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Steven Vanackere, and Federal Minister of Energy, Environment and Sustainable Development, Marie-Christine Marghem.

At a working session with the EC Vice President, Mr Binh told his host that Vietnam always attaches importance to its relations with the EU and praised the positive developments in Vietnam – EU cooperation over recent years, especially in trade and investment. The EU is Vietnam’s second largest trading partner and export market, accounting for 18% of the country’s exports.

In addition, the EU is among the five biggest foreign investors in Vietnam with last year’s turnover in bilateral trade approaching US$52 billion, and Vietnam’s trade surplus with the European bloc hovering around US$31.8 billion.

The two sides agreed to ratify the EU-Vietnam Framework Agreement on Comprehensive Partnership and Cooperation (PCA), which aims to create an important legal framework to elevate comprehensive ties between Vietnam and the EU.

Mr Binh highlighted the EVFTA’s great benefits to Vietnam and the whole EU, as it will lay the foundation for closer cohesion between the EU and Southeast Asia, and the Asia-Pacific region, bucking the trend of rising protectionism in other nations around the world.

His views received support from senior Belgian officials such as Marie-Christine Marghem, who remarked that Belgium fully supports the EVFTA negotiations.

At other working sessions in Belgium, the two sides affirmed that economic and financial cooperation is of fundamental importance to bilateral ties and pledged to boost coordination for a productive implementation of the outcomes of the fourth meeting of the Joint Committee and to take more effective measures to support import, export, trade and investment activities.

The Belgian side will facilitate the Vietnamese products which meet its standards in accessing distribution channels and supermarket and retail networks, with a focus on agricultural and seafood products.

For his part, Mr Binh assured Vietnam’s  sustained  efforts to improve the investment and business environment and accelerate economic restructuring, focusing on the equitisation of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and suggested the Belgian government  encourage its businesses to intensify their investment in Vietnam in prioritized and key areas  such as sea transport, logistics services, green technology, agriculture, renewable energy, and health care as well as engaging in the equitisation of SOEs.

He asked Belgium to speed up the progress of urban development and climate change adaptation projects in Ninh Thuan, Binh Thuan, and Ha Tinh, which have used Belgium non-refundable aid, and to swiftly complete the drainage and wastewater treatment project in Cua Lo Town (second phase).

Source: VOV

80/ Free trade accord signed with Canada

Israel and Canada signed a new free trade agreement on Wednesday.

Israeli Economy Minister Eli Cohen and Canadian Minister of International Trade François-Philippe Champagne concluded the deal between their two countries.

Israel said that the amount of Israeli-Canadian trade has doubled in value since 1997, when the existing free trade agreement was signed. In 2013, trade between the two countries exceeded $1 billion.

Israel has free access to the Canadian market when selling baked goods, fresh and processed fruits, vegetables and wines. In exchange, Canada gets free access to the Israeli market for baked goods, berries and spices.

Israeli hummus, among other items to be sold in Canada, will enjoy tax-free status when less than 400 tons are sold.

This is the third free trade agreement signed this year by the Israeli government, after agreements with Panama and Ukraine.

Source: Hamodia

 

Tin bài 04/6

81/ Azevêdo: We must face the challenges of a new industrial revolution

Speaking at the International Monetary Conference in Washington D.C. on 4 June, Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said that at a time of fundamental economic change dominated by automation and new technologies, we need to find ways to shape the new economy in a way that benefits all, to speak up for the trading system as a powerful force for growth and development and to be ready to evolve to meet the challenges of today. He concluded: “We have the chance to ensure that this revolution is truly inclusive, to reshape the debate, and to ensure that a modern, responsive trading system is part of the solution.”

Thank you Mr Waddell,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Good morning. Thank you for your kind invitation.

We are living through a time of fundamental structural economic change – but also a time of real disaffection and division.

Throughout history these two factors – economic change and social division – are often found together. Today we say we’re seeing the ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution’. The term is accurate, not just because of the economic message it sends, but also because of the societal upheaval it implies.

Previous industrial revolutions created great wealth and opportunity, but they also created significant social disruption – with many missing out on the benefits entirely.

In my view, the economic revolution we are seeing today has to be different. It has to be inclusive. It has to be an answer to the problems we are seeing today – not an aggravating factor. So we all have a responsibility to mould it in this way – and that includes trade and the trading system.

The expansion of global trade in recent decades has helped to lift hundreds of millions of people out of poverty. It has helped to raise living standards for many millions more. And it has boosted growth and development around the world. It has acted as a tool to deliver in the national self-interest – not as a threat to those interests.

I know that I don’t have to make the case for globalisation here. But, as positive as it has been on the whole, there is no doubt that many people feel excluded. Many feel angry and let down.

I don’t detract from those concerns at all. They are absolutely valid and heartfelt, and they demand a response. My priority, however, is that we find the right response.

The tendency can be to find easy targets – the foreigner or the outsider. And as these sentiments enter the political arena, they can lead the debate down the path of nationalism, intolerance, and protectionism. This is a real concern.

Of course moves towards protectionism are nothing new. Since World War 2, whenever tensions have emerged between trading partners, the multilateral trading system has been able to respond effectively, keeping those tensions at bay.

We all rely on the stability and predictability that the system creates. In fact, it can be argued that without the WTO, we would have been in a trade war some years ago.

After the crisis of 2008 we did not see an outbreak of protectionist policies, as we did in the past. This is precisely because of the framework of rules and practices provided by the multilateral trading system, by the WTO.

However, the circumstances today feel somehow different from anything we have seen before.

Some of the policies and the rhetoric in the trade debate are not just seeking to raise barriers here and there, or to challenge specific elements of the rules. Rather, they are actively opposed to the aims of the trading system itself. Long-held principles such as shared rules, cooperation, dispute settlement through the system, and enhancing stability and predictability, seem to be thrown into question.

Taking those policies further could undermine the system, and thereby pose a serious risk to the stability of the global economy as a whole.

Of course, I understand the attraction in wishing away the rulebook. The bigger the country, the bigger this temptation becomes. But these same leading economies created this rules-based system for a very good reason.

Without the rules, trade war would be a certainty. Unilateral actions would escalate, leading to a tit-for-tat series of trade measures. In the best case scenario this could happen slowly and take time to develop. But if we go down this road, the destination is clear.

And in an interconnected economy, the effects of such actions would likely be globalised, reaching far beyond those countries who are directly involved. These effects are likely to spread to many different economic sectors as well, touching on areas that were entirely disconnected from “ground zero”.

Let me give you one illustration of how disruptive this could be. If tariffs returned to the levels before the multilateral trading system was created, we could see trade flows fall by almost two thirds. At the same time, the global economy could contract by 2.4%. That’s even bigger than the contraction after the 2008 crisis. It’s an extreme example, but it shows just how important the system is.

So how should we respond?

The challenge is to shape the new economy in a positive and inclusive way, and to shape the debate which is raging on these issues right now.

I think that there are three main steps we need to take.

The first step is to take a clear-eyed look at what is really causing the disruptions in our economies.

The research shows that trade is not the key factor.

The majority of jobs lost in manufacturing, around 80%, have been lost due to automation and new technologies.

This is the major force that is driving economic change today.

The shift is structural, and it is global – it is not only happening in the advanced economies. McKinsey research suggests that by 2030 manufacturing jobs will fall by 22% in China and 15% in India.

And it will affect the services sector as well – including financial services.

As Artificial Intelligence develops, it’s going to be replacing white-collar jobs in fields such as accounting, banking and legal services. According to the Bank of England, as many as 15 million jobs in the UK could end up being replaced by AI-enabled software and machines in the years ahead.

A response that simply raises trade barriers would not respond to the cause of the difficulties we face today. Indeed, choking off global trade would only bring greater harm.

The fact is we are entering a new economic era. The ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution’ is real.

We need to find ways to adapt and do it in a way that benefits all, with a particular focus on those who are being left behind.

And we have no time to waste. We have no precedent for the speed, scale and scope of change that is underway today. Besides, entrepreneurs, companies and other economic agents are already creating rules, norms, techniques and infrastructure around the new technologies. So it is clear that, in 10 years, it will be too late to try to frame these changes in a more inclusive manner.

The structure of new technologies will be more or less set, and the perspectives and values of those who created them will be firmly embedded in possibly anti-competitive platforms and within the many technologies that surround us and which have become part of us.

So this is an urgent challenge.

In addition, we need to help the workforce to adjust to these new realities. Domestic policies will be key here.

Education, skills and support policies, for example, will have to evolve to match the challenges of the new economy. And there is no ‘one size fits all’ recipe to deal with these challenges. Each country will have to find the policies that work best for them.

So that’s the first step – responding to real drivers of change today.

With all of that in mind, the second step is to speak up for the trading system, and to raise awareness of its inherent value.

Trade can continue to be a powerful force for growth and development in the world – but only if we continue to strengthen and improve it.

Governments listen to the private sector. Yet, I think that many are not making their views heard. This has to change. The global trading system cannot be taken for granted. Its efficacy and responsiveness rely on the support of those who have the clear vision to perceive its vital importance.

This brings me to my third point; the third step.

International institutions – including the WTO – need to be ready to evolve to meet the challenges of today. The trading system needs to be responsive to members’ needs.

While stability is essential, that does not mean stasis. Helping governments and businesses meet the demands of a rapidly evolving global economy is a vital, on-going task for multilateral institutions.

Our members have shown that they are prepared to deliver new reforms, and that they are prepared to think differently.

The WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement is a case in point. This deal aims to streamline, simplify and standardise customs procedures. Estimates show that the full implementation of the Agreement could reduce trade costs globally by an average of 14.3 per cent. The economic impact here would be greater than if we eliminated all tariffs that exist today around the world.

This Agreement succeeded because members were willing to do things differently and pursue a more flexible framework for that agreement.

In an organisation with 164 members of different sizes, different political priorities and different stages of development, these kinds of flexibilities are essential.

Members are still seeking to make progress where negotiations are already ongoing. And many have begun conversations in a number of new areas, which are related to the economic changes we are living through.

This includes discussions on:

• electronic commerce,
• investment facilitation,
• steps to help smaller businesses to trade, and
• how trade connects to the economic empowerment of women.

Trade finance is another case in point.

After the financial crisis banks started to pull out of certain markets as risk appetites shrank and new regulations changed the calculus.

Huge gaps have since emerged in trade finance provision. The Asian Development Bank estimated that the global trade finance gap was $1.5 trillion. And of course the effects are felt most acutely by SMEs and in developing countries.

I am working with the International Finance Corporation, the regional development banks, the Financial Stability Board and others to tackle this issue. This is vital if the system is to be genuinely inclusive and responsive to its users.

So there is a range of challenges before us.

We are on the cusp of a new era. It truly is a new industrial revolution. And this demands a truly revolutionary response aiming at the right targets.

It demands clear thinking. It demands new thinking. And it demands engagement – we can’t just cross our fingers and hope for the best.

We have the chance to ensure that this revolution is truly inclusive, to reshape the debate, and to ensure that a modern, responsive trading system is part of the solution.

I look forward to your support towards that end.

Thank you.

Source:wto.org

 

Tin bài 05/6

82/ Azevêdo on World Environment Day: ‘Trade has important role in protecting the planet’

On the occasion of World Environment Day on 5 June, WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo highlighted the important role of trade in fostering a sustainable world economy. An open and transparent trading system aligned with sound environmental policies acts as a catalyst for enhancing the protection and well-being of the planet, DG Azevêdo said.

“By providing a unique forum to discuss trade and environment issues, the WTO helps members explore the best solutions for promoting sustainable development. Members, recognizing their shared goal of enhancing the welfare of people, can build on the openness and transparency of the global trading system to act as a catalyst for dismantling subsidies and other distortions with perverse environmental consequences, lowering the cost of sustainability, and hastening the transition into greener economies,” DG Azevêdo said.

“The world has always looked to trade as a powerful tool to improve the well-being of humankind. Protecting the environment is an important facet of that mission and, as such, the trade agenda must continue to be supportive of global environmental goals while also delivering on growth and development,” he said.

The WTO’s founding document, the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the WTO, recognizes the objective of sustainable development and the legitimacy of environmental protection as national and international goals. In line with this, WTO members have been negotiating an agreement to prohibit harmful fisheries subsidies, examining links between natural disasters and trade, and exploring opportunities for facilitating trade in environmental goods and services.

International trade policy has long been a vital part of the global environmental effort with linkages discussed in the Stockholm Conference of 1972 and more recently highlighted in the accomplishment of Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals.

In an effort to strengthen the partnership between the trade and environment communities, UN Environment Executive Director Erik Solheim and DG Azevêdo launched on 25 January a new dialogue to identify ways of ensuring that trade and environment policies are mutually supportive. The first initiative under this joint effort will be a high-level forum on Trade and Environment to be held in October.

Source:wto.org

 

83/ Members debate IP’s societal value, role with competition policy to promote public health

At the meeting of the Council for Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) on 5-6 June, WTO members discussed intellectual property (IP) from two perspectives: the societal value of IP in the new economy and its role in improving lives, as part of a recurrent item on IP and innovation; and the promotion of public health through competition law and policy, in the framework of the discussion on IP and the public interest.

IP and innovation: the societal value of IP in today’s economy – IP improving lives

As part of a series of items on IP and innovation regularly added to the Council’s agenda since 2012, the co-sponsors (Australia, Canada, the European Union, Japan, Republic of Korea, Switzerland, Chinese Taipei and the United States) stressed in this item the importance of the IP system as an integral element of policy frameworks that support innovation. They also underlined IP’s importance as a means to promote and protect the expression of new ideas and inventions, incentivise and foster ingenuity and follow-on innovation, and enable cross-border collaboration, trade and engagement in global value chains.

In supporting and incentivising innovation, the co-sponsors said, IP frameworks make a significant contribution to improving lives through social and economic growth and advancement, including in sectors such as education and training, creative works, health, the environment and transport. In the case of the education and the training sector, for example, students enjoy learning from a wide range of IP-protected materials, including innovative research, books and documentaries, and have access to new methods and tools of learning. Also in the creative sector, IP and innovation can increase employment opportunities and create new value chains.

The proponents highlighted that new technology is changing transportation, delivery and monitoring, with self-driving cars and buses, and business using drones to deliver goods and to monitor crops, animals or the impact of significant weather events. They invited other members to share examples of inventions or creations that are the result of IP systems and have benefited or improved lives.

One member noted that while policy makers increasingly see harnessing technological progress as a key priority to boost economic growth and improve living standards, the relationship between intellectual property rights (IPRs) and development is quite complex. Economic literature is inconclusive, and any attempt to quantify the contribution of IPR frameworks to improve lives through social and economic growth needs to appreciate the variable nature of the legal frameworks that support them and rely on models that enable developing countries to catch up, this member said.

The member also underscored that affordable access to information and communication technologies (ICTs) is essential for people and enterprises to take an active part in evolving digital economies and to reap development gains from it, particularly taking into account that more than half of the world’s population remains offline and the broadband divide is wider than ever. It invited the co-sponsors to engage in a substantive discussion on a number of questions.

Another member said that the evolution of IP rules in developed countries suggest that the design of IP rules and policies should be adaptable to the changing needs of societies. This is reflected in the fact that IP protection in developed countries increased as their industrial and technological capacities improved over time. While IPRs may provide an incentive to innovate, they are neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition and could only be effective in certain contexts. IPRs cannot boost innovation if the required conditions, skills, information, capital, market prospects, etc. do not exist, this member said.

IP and the public interest: promoting public health through competition law and policy

This ad hoc item was submitted by China and South Africa and co-sponsored by Brazil and India. Members were invited to share their national experiences and examples of how competition law is used to achieve public health objectives. The debate focused on how to enhance understanding of various approaches in the use of competition law and policy to prevent or deter practices such as excessive pricing or abusive clauses in licensing agreements that unreasonably restrict access to new technology, prevent the entry of generic companies and may result in higher prices for medicines. In the co-sponsors’ view, competition tools do not undermine IPRs, but rather reinforce them.

On behalf of the proponents, South Africa noted that competition law is one of the least discussed flexibilities within the WTO’s Agreement on Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) and stressed that the main objective of competition law is to protect the integrity of competitive markets against the abuse of IPRs and to protect consumers.

Even though the TRIPS Agreement sets minimum norms for standards for IP protection that significantly limit members discretion on a large number of IP rights issues, South Africa highlighted, it is not the case with competition law because members are free to design competition laws in such a way as to take account of their domestic interests and needs, including taking account of their respective levels of development. In this regard, various provisions of the TRIPS Agreement are relevant to competition law – Article 6, Article 31 (k) and Article 40 – leaving broad discretion to members in how they apply completion law in respect of the acquisition and exercise of IP rights as long as the measures taken were consistent with the TRIPS Agreement, as provided for by Article 8.

Some members expressed their concern that this agenda item could bring about a discussion on public interest that fails to account fully for the benefits of protecting IP. One potential negative consequence of an insufficiently nuanced discussion could be discouraging members from striving towards and upholding robust domestic IP regimes, harming incentives for critical future innovations that would greatly benefit the public. In their view, IP enhances rather than prevents competition, and the two policy domains should be therefore seen as complementary.

Furthermore, it was pointed out by some members that IP and competition are distinct disciplines implemented and overseen by different administrative authorities. The TRIPS Council is therefore not the ideal venue to have a detailed discussion of competition law and policy concepts. The discussion in the TRIPS Council should be strictly limited to IP-related issues, these members said.

Technology transfer to LDCs

The Council continued the discussion of the Council’s last meeting in February following a proposal by the LDC Group in which developed members are asked to fully implement their technology transfer requirements under WTO rules (Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement).

As at the last Council meeting, the proposal triggered an engaged discussion with interventions of representatives of least-developed countries (LDCs) and their co-operation partners.

LDCs reiterated the need to know exactly what incentives developed countries are providing to their companies and institutions in their territories. They said that the notifications of developed countries make reference to technical assistance projects and programmes, but do not detail the incentives provided nor specify the purpose of the incentive that is to encourage the transfer of technology to LDCs. The proponents shared a document with some ideas to move forward and suggesting the adoption of an agreed illustrative list of what could constitute an “incentive to enterprises and institutions in the territories” of developed country members.

Developed countries said that they were not too convinced about the existence of a problem in need of a solution. Annual reports on this issue presented before the WTO clearly identify programmes benefiting LDC members, they said. The LDC proposal would undermine long-standing and beneficial reporting requirements, they went on, stressing also that technology transfer can proceed most effectively if it takes place on voluntary and mutually-agreed terms by the involved parties, and not on terms prescribed by the TRIPS Council. Some also questioned the need for an illustrative list of incentives.

TRIPS amendment

The chair, Walter Werner of Germany, informed that since the last meeting of the Council, Côte d’Ivoire has deposited its instrument of acceptance for the 2005 protocol amending the TRIPS Agreement, which applies now to 125 WTO members. The remaining 39 members are still operating under the 2003 waiver Decision, which is due to expire by the end of 2019.

The up-to-date list and map of members that have accepted the protocol are available here.

E-TRIPS online platform

The WTO Secretariat informed members that the Notification Submission System (NSS), an optional online tool for submitting TRIPS notifications, review materials and reports, is very close to completion and will be available for members by this summer.

As part of the project to improve the timeliness and completeness of notifications and other information flows, the e-TRIPS platform will also include in due time a TRIPS Information Gateway – an online tool for searching and consulting TRIPS documentation, including over 20 years of accumulated notifications.

New chair and next meeting

The Council appointed Dr Walter Werner of Germany as its new chairperson for the coming year. The next formal meeting of the TRIPS Council will be on 8-9 November 2018.

Source:wto.org

 

84/ Winning the battle against plastic pollution with International Standards on World Environment Day!

Plastic is an important material in our economy and daily lives. It has multiple functions that can help tackle a number of the challenges facing our society, be it packaging that ensures food safety and reduces food waste, light and innovate materials that lower fuel consumption, or bio-compatible plastics in medicine that save human lives. On the other side, there is an urgent need to address the environmental problems that today cast a shadow over the use of end products. The million tonnes of plastic litter that find their way into our oceans are one of the most visible and alarming signs of these problems.

“Beat Plastic Pollution”, the theme of this year’s World Environment Day (5 June), is a call to action for all of us to come together to combat one of the great environmental challenges of our time. ISO standards can help us achieve this goal by increasing efficiency and reducing unnecessary waste around the world.

How ISO can help?

Examples of deliverables that can help include ISO 17422 on guidance for the inclusion of environmental considerations in standards, ISO 15270 on the recovery and recycling of plastics waste and a future technical report – ISO/TR 21960 – on knowledge and methodologies for plastics in the environment. In addition, a set of standards on the carbon and environmental footprint of biobased plastics (ISO 16620 and ISO 22526) will help businesses reduce their environmental impact.

ISO standards for the marine environment can also save precious resources. ISO 18830, ISO 19679 and the future ISO 22404 will help organizations understand degradation and performance over the product’s lifetime – invaluable for ensuring that a given material is the optimum choice. ISO is also developing ISO 22403 and ISO 22766 to determine the recycling and reuse of plastics, and prevent their leaching into the environment. Regarding plastic leakage into our oceans, standardization solutions could lead to a significant environmental benefit.

As Dr Eric Bischof, Chair of the ISO subcommittee responsible for plastics and the environment, explains: “I firmly believe that standardization can foster increased resource efficiency in general, help reduce waste leakage and support resource-efficient circular economy solutions. A strong involvement of interested parties is however a prerequisite to develop smart, broadly accepted standards that really make a difference.”

World Environment Day, which is organized by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), is also a day for people from all walks of life to come together to ensure a cleaner, greener and brighter outlook for themselves and future generations.

UNEP participates in various ISO technical committees and has been involved in the development of some of these standards.

Our campaign

Join us from 4 to 8 June 2018 on social media with #environmentalstandards to find out how ISO and its members are contributing to the fight against plastic pollution, as well as what are the latest most innovative standards helping us mitigate and adapt to climate change.

Source:iso.org

 

85/ Mexican firms eye workaround on US tariffs with eyes on NAFTA deal

Mexican firms will need to cut deals with suppliers and consider buying goods elsewhere once a conflict over US steel and aluminum import tariffs starts to bite.

Mexican firms will need to cut deals with suppliers and consider buying goods elsewhere once a conflict over US steel and aluminum import tariffs starts to bite, even as consumers are seen ultimately picking up the tab from any higher prices.

Company executives are braced for increased costs, while holding out hope that US President Donald Trump’s tariffs are more of a negotiating tactic to pressure Mexico and Canada in talks to rework the North American Free Trade Agreement.

“Of course, it’s a very serious distortion in the industry, because all the supply chains that use these types of materials are impacted every time they cross the border,” said Jose Ramon Elizondo, chairman of manufacturer Vasconia Group.

One of Vasconia’s units produces aluminum sheets, more than half of which are exported to the United States.

“We’re going to have a series of negotiations and discussions with clients who have to absorb this tax,” Elizondo told Reuters.

Japanese auto safety products maker Ashimori Industry Co Ltd , whose plant in the central city of Silao in Mexico’s automotive heartland makes seat belts and air bags for the likes of Honda, Nissan, Mazda and Subaru, is in a similar bind.

“We aren’t aluminum manufacturers but we are in the industry, so at some point we’re going to have to absorb the price increases,” said Hiroyuki Namba, president of Ashimori Mexico. “I hope the (measures) aren’t definitive.”

Critics of the US move say the escalating dispute could drive firms in Mexico to buy steel and aluminum elsewhere.

“Once we hit them and close US imports, we will have to source from third markets,” said a Mexican official, who asked not to be named.

Mexico’s government said it would retaliate with targeted tariffs on pork legs, apples, grapes and cheeses, plus steel.

The Mexican official said once the retaliatory measures were put in place, the situation could backfire for Trump and end up hurting American producers.

It is “economics 101 for dummies,” the official added.

Mexico expects to publish the list of specific US products it will hit on Tuesday or Wednesday, the Economy Ministry said.

Trump’s tariffs are aimed at allowing the US steel and aluminum industries to increase capacity utilization rates above 80 percent for the first time in years. Still, Mexico already has a trade deficit in those metals with the United States.

Alfredo Arzola, head of the automotive industry cluster in the central state of Guanajuato, said many auto parts makers in Mexico could be exempt from the US tariffs because their steel and aluminum imports from the United States are temporary.

“The steel and aluminum that stays in the domestic market for sale will be affected and the (higher) prices will be passed on to the consumer,” said Arzola.

But most auto parts makers import metals to turn them into value-added products that are shipped back to the United States as part of automakers’ cross-border value chains.

If those products comply with regional content rules under NAFTA, they are exempt from the tariffs, Arzola said.

Source: Devdiscourse

 

86/ FTA talks with European Union revives Indian business confidence

Business confidence, falling after last year’s election, has been buoyed by news that the Government is in discussion with the European Union over a new free trade agreement.

The Coalition Government has also taken steps to progress the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) and to refresh the China Free Trade Agreement (CFTA). Business leaders believe that these agreements are beneficial to their growth.

The Government is promoting negotiations to progress these agreements on the basis of the potential positive impact in terms of jobs and prosperity for New Zealanders.

Low export levels

Given our small population, new markets for growing exports are a factor that can generate better living standards.

Despite being regarded as a trading nation, New Zealand exports are below 30% of GDP.

These are amongst the lower levels for developed countries. Deeper penetration into export markets across a wide range of businesses is required to achieve better living standards.

For all New Zealanders to benefit from free-trade agreements, it is time that these agreements are transparent. Trade agreements need to lower the barriers of trade, not just for big business but also small and medium-size businesses.

Larger role for smaller businesses

SMEs account for over 92% of New Zealand enterprises, yet it is large and influential businesses and trade groups traditionally represented in trade negotiations.

Greater engagement throughout the economy can only happen through greater transparency in trade negotiations.

Genuinely progressive and inclusive agreements have potential to bring benefits to exporters and consumers alike, while maintaining product standards that Kiwis care about.

They multiply the opportunities to trade into overseas export markets and to reduce our cost of living through cheaper imports.

These factors, in combination, support an environment for growing high-quality, high-wage local jobs and enable out local businesses, small, medium and large to grow.

Progress with China

New Zealand’s free trade agreement with China has resulted in a significant increase in value and volume of exports to China. New Zealand’s exports to China, five years before the 2008 Free Trade Agreement came into effect, were worth $1.4 billion. Today, annual exports to China are $26 billion after ten years of exponential trade growth.

A question is whether these exports have generated high-quality and high-wage jobs given that a large proportion of these exports are raw materials such as pine logs with limited added value. The EU has estimated that a free trade agreement with them could result in up to a $2 billion boost to New Zealand’s GDP, and up to a 20% increase in our exports to Europe.

New Zealand is known for its exports of agricultural products to the EU.

In fact, services sector trade to the EU made up 41% of New Zealand’s total exports in 2017.

Services such as the education and training, financial and insurance services, and, engineering and architectural consultancies are significant export enterprises that also add value and generate quality jobs.

Transparency essential

For Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) to offer additional significant new opportunities for both sides to expand, it is time now to stop the misleading rhetoric about the past agreements being “free, transparent, open and accountable.”

In 2015, the EU Ombudsman delivered a decision about EU FTAs.

The point she made was that in a globally-networked world, citizens simply won’t put up with the secrecy that has been a feature of FTAs to date.

With transparency, it is possible to consider a full range of trade options so that businesses of any size or sector can meet the economic challenges of the decades ahead.

Every day Kiwis need to see tangible benefits from trade agreements: Where are the lower costs for consumers? Where are the jobs? Transparency is a way of shedding light on the factors that lead to products like food and other consumer goods becoming available at lower cost while maintaining quality.

In the absence of transparency, how do businesses and consumers know if there is a level playing field through reductions in tariffs, duties and other trade barriers?

Improving accountability

Since the UK joined the European Economic Community 40 years ago, trade agreements have been negotiated behind the scenes by government experts heavily influenced by special interests.

For trade agreements to realise their potential in increasing returns to trade, they need to be open, transparent and comprehensive. New Zealand can pave the way through a better, more open conversation when negotiating trade agreements.

To negotiate a transparent FTA with the EU would be an outstanding achievement.

Its primary objective should be for all New Zealanders to see and understand the provisions of the agreement, and through this, identify ways to benefit from it.

At the start, New Zealand can insist on rules of engagement that are open, transparent and designed to engage businesses to participate in shaping the agreement.

As Trade Minister David Parker says of the EU FTA: “We share so many values in pursuit of a better world. Human rights, environmentalism, multilateralism and trade. This will be good for us all.”

There will be an even better chance that we all benefit if other shared values underpinning the trade agreement, include transparency, accountability and inclusivity.

Source: Indian News Links

 

87/ EU charm offensive

New Zealand is keeping pressure on the EU as formal talks to set an agenda for negotiating a free trade agreement are a few weeks away.

Trade Minister David Parker has been to France for an OECD meeting, for WTO talks and for discussions in France and Germany on the pending EU/NZ FTA.

Meanwhile, EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström will visit NZ on June 20 to formally launch the negotiations with Parker. And officials from the EU and NZ will meet to set the agenda for a formal detailed meeting in Brussels in July.

Agriculture, in particular reduced tariffs on dairy products, will be a high priority for the NZ negotiators.

Parker says NZ and the EU are close and natural partners on almost every global issue.

“An EU-New Zealand FTA will bring real benefits to both sides. It could also provide a model for what can be achieved between two parties committed to progressive and inclusive trade policies that benefit all our people,” he says.

Also in Europe now is NZ’s agricultural trade envoy Mike Petersen on a two-week trip building relationships between NZ, the EU and the UK ahead of the trade talks.

Petersen is in talks in Wales, which he says is important because when Brexit occurs administrations such as Wales become important and working with them now is critical for what lies ahead.

“I will also go to Prague to attend the Eucolait Conference,” he told Rural News. “This is a grouping of European dairy traders with about 500 members and associate members from other countries. I will also go to Germany for talks.”

Petersen says his visit, like others, is designed to protect NZ’s trading position with the EU and UK. NZ is not looking to make gains because of Brexit, rather just to protect our existing trading position.

Petersen says while NZ is well known in Europe as a friendly country that has stood by many EU countries for years, it is still up against stiff competition.

“These visits are very important but that’s not really understood in NZ.

“We need to remember that about 200 countries are travelling to Europe to try to protect their position and look for opportunities out of Brexit. We need to work hard to protect our current position and then new build on that with the EU and the UK.”

Petersen applauds Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s visit to France and Germany earlier this year as instrumental in getting the FTA negotiations underway.

“But we can’t just leave it all to our negotiators or politicians. We need to be working right across the spectrum and build good relations at every level in every country,” he says.

Source: Rural News

 

 

 

 

Tin bài 06/6

88/ EU initiates new WTO compliance proceedings over Airbus subsidies

The European Union has requested WTO dispute consultations with the United States to address the EU’s claim that the EU and its member states have complied with the WTO ruling on subsidies to Airbus which was adopted by the Dispute Settlement Body on 28 May. The request was circulated to WTO members on 06 June.

In its request for consultations under Article 21.5 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU), the EU said it has withdrawn remaining subsidies at issue and/or taken appropriate steps to remove their adverse effects.

Further information is available in document WT/DS316/36.

Source: wto.org

 

89/ European Union files WTO complaint against China’s protection of intellectual property rights

The European Union has requested WTO consultations with China concerning certain Chinese measures which the EU alleges are inconsistent with China’s obligations under the WTO’s Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs). The request was circulated to WTO members on 6 June.

The EU in particular alleges that a number of China’s legal and regulatory instruments unfairly restrict foreign intellectual property rights holders from freely negotiating market-based terms in technology-related contracts and impose mandatory contracts concerning the import of technology into China.

Further information is available in document WT/DS549/1.

What is a request for consultations?

The request for consultations formally initiates a dispute in the WTO. Consultations give the parties an opportunity to discuss the matter and to find a satisfactory solution without proceeding further with litigation. After 60 days, if consultations have failed to resolve the dispute, the complainant may request adjudication by a panel.

Source: wto.org

 

90/ EU, Canada initiate WTO dispute complaints against US steel, aluminium duties

The European Union and Canada have requested WTO dispute consultations with the United States regarding US duties on certain imported steel and aluminium products. The requests were circulated to WTO members on 6 June.

The EU and Canada claim in their separate filings that the US duties of 25% and 10% on imports of steel and aluminium products respectively are inconsistent with provisions of the WTO’s General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 and the Agreement on Safeguards.

Further information is available in documents WT/DS548/1 and WT/DS550/1.

What is a request for consultations?

The request for consultations formally initiates a dispute in the WTO. Consultations give the parties an opportunity to discuss the matter and to find a satisfactory solution without proceeding further with litigation. After 60 days, if consultations have failed to resolve the dispute, the complainant may request adjudication by a panel.

Source: wto.org

 

91/  Prime Minister hosts Greek Ambassador

At a reception for Raptakis in Hanoi on June 4, PM Phuc expressed his hope that Greece will support Vietnam’s efforts to boost its ties with the EU and soon officially reach the EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement.

Vietnam wants to cooperate with Greece in the areas of the country’s strength like shipbuilding, vessel maintenance and management, maritime transportation services and seaport exploitation, the leader said.

Pledging optimal conditions for Greek businesses and investors in Vietnam, PM Phuc noted his hope that the ambassador will organize visits of many delegations of Greek firms to Vietnam to seek business and investment opportunities in the country.

He called on the two sides to speed up the implementation of agreements on cooperation in culture and tourism, and exchange experience and join hands in archaeology as well as preservation and restoration of historical relic sites.

For his part, Raptakis affirmed that Greece always attaches importance to enhancing relations with Vietnam.

The diplomat said he hopes that Vietnam and Greece will sign an agreement on double taxation avoidance and another agreement on maritime transportation at an early date to facilitate bilateral collaboration.

Raptakis promised to do his utmost to complete his assigned tasks, contributing to advancing relations between the two countries in a more effective and pragmatic fashion.

Source: NDO/VNA

 

Tin bài 07/6

92/ Russia mulls suing US in WTO on steel, aluminum tariffs

The US introduced new duties for steel and aluminum products amounting to 25% for steel and 10% for aluminum

Russia is considering an option of bringing the United States to a trial in the World Trade Organization (WTO) in connection with steel and aluminum duties imposed by the US, department director of the Russian Ministry of Economic Development Maxim Medvedkov said on Wednesday in an interview with the Rossiya 24 TV Channel.

“We are currently considering this issue – it is quite possible that we will also think of bringing the US to the WTO tribunal [because of introduced duties on steel and aluminum - TASS],” Medvedkov said.

The United States introduced new duties for steel and aluminum products amounting to 25% for steel and 10% for aluminum.

Russia said it can dispute the US decision in the WTO, notified the Organization about possible retaliation measures in connection with duties and made an offer to the EU to jointly undertake measures for protection of Russian and European business in connection with new tariffs.

The European Union disputed the US decision within the WTO framework on June 1.

Source: TASS

 

93/ Local authorities reject a series of FDI projects

Under current laws, if investors don’t contact the agencies which granted the investment licenses to them within 90 days from the notice, their projects will be terminated in Vietnam and procedures will be implemented as stipulated by the law.

In HCM City, in the first half of May, state management agencies released a series of notices looking for the investors whose projects had stopped operating for a long time.

The projects were registered by investors from many different countries and territories, including the US, South Korea, Taiwan and the Philippines.

Business names included Weita (Samoa), Ventron Technologies Vietnam (the US), Thermatex Vietnam (a joint venture with the investor from Australia), Caravans (Australia), Taa Wieu (Taiwan), Korvet (South Korea), Hielectric (Taiwan), C&N (Philippines) and Maxrob (US).

HCM City regularly examines the implementation of projects registered in the city to revoke licenses of projects which were not implemented as committed. To date, the HCM City People’s Committee has annulled 577 projects and reduced the land area allocated to 10 projects.

In October 2017, the Hoa Binh IZ Management Board released a notice for the investor of two projects – the Bia Tiep brewery and Lac Thinh IZ. Both projects were registered by one investor – BTG Holding.

Bia Tiep Brewery received the investment registration certificate in October 2012. It was praised as a great achievement of the Hoa Binh provincial authorities in attracting FDI. The project had the largest investment capital licensed in the locality at that time.

Under the project, BTG Holding would build an 86 million euro brewery with capacity of 190 million liters a year. Beer would be exported to South Korea, China and Japan.

The investor estimated that its first products would hit the market in 2015. After that, BTG Holding will build a thermal power plant worth 100 million euros and a car parts factory worth 200 million euros.

However, the projects are still on paper.

An analyst commented that the elimination of projects is just a ‘formality’, because in fact, the projects have stopped operating for a long time.

Weita project, for example, stopped operations in August 2004, Ventron Technologies Vietnam in August 2010 and Thermatex in March 2011. There are the projects which have stopped operation for 14-15 years, but their “deaths” had never been publicly declared.

Source: VietNamNet Bridge

 

94/ Putting the trust back into online reviews

Consumer reviews play an increasingly strong role in purchasing decisions, but with a plethora of platforms and opinions, whose view can you trust? A new standard just published aims to put some order into the process to restore back our faith.

Both a bane and a boon for companies, online reviews are often the first port of call for consumers and the Internet is now awash with Websites dedicated to the evaluation of everything from restaurants to lawyers. And we love them. A Forbes study showed that 90 % of consumers read online reviews before visiting a business and those reviews impact 67 % of purchasing decisions¹⁾.

Yet, for as many reliable reviews, there are just as many that are less so, with controversies around fake reviews, customers with an axe to grind, companies modifying or screening notes to weed out bad testimonies, false negative reviews written by competitors and other “dodgy dealings” that erode trust in the whole process.

A new ISO standard just published aims to change all that by detailing requirements for organizations to effectively manage consumer review sites and featuring recommendations that will help increase consumer trust and protect suppliers from exploitation.

Aimed at review Websites as well as the companies themselves, ISO 20488, Online consumer reviews – Principles and requirements for their collection, moderation and publication, is the first International Standard published by ISO’s technical committee for online reputation, ISO/TC 290²⁾.

Reflecting international best practice throughout the process, from collection to moderation and to publication, it helps companies boost consumer confidence in online reviews, protect suppliers from mischief and improve the quality of products and services provided.

Committee Chair Laurent Petit said that online reviews empower consumers by allowing them to exchange information, views and experiences, which in turn can drive industry improvements.

“The ability to write and read online reviews is very empowering for the consumer, and there are millions posted each year,” he commented.

“However, it is vital to both consumers and suppliers that review sites are well managed and the content is reliable, otherwise trust is eroded and reputations are damaged unnecessarily.

“ISO 20488 aims to improve the management of these sites – and thus their credibility – based on guiding principles of integrity, transparency and accuracy.”

ISO 20488 is available from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

1) Forbes: 20 Online Reputation Statistics That Every Business Owner Needs To Know

2) The secretariat for ISO/TC 290, Online reputation, is held by AFNOR, ISO’s member for France.

Source:iso.org

 

95/ Mexico initiates WTO dispute complaint against US steel, aluminium duties

Mexico has requested WTO dispute consultations with the United States regarding US duties on certain imported steel and aluminium products. The request was circulated to WTO members on 7 June.

Further information is available in document WT/DS551/1.

What is a request for consultations?

The request for consultations formally initiates a dispute in the WTO. Consultations give the parties an opportunity to discuss the matter and to find a satisfactory solution without proceeding further with litigation. After 60 days, if consultations have failed to resolve the dispute, the complainant may request adjudication by a panel.

• More on consultations
• Current status of disputes

Source:wto.org

 

96/ Business leaders express support for the WTO and call for action on priority issues

Senior business representatives meeting today (7 June 2018) at the WTO headquarters discussed how the WTO could help them address the challenges they face in conducting global trade. They sent a strong message of support for the WTO and the rules-based multilateral trading system, stressing its role in creating economic stability and supporting growth, development and job creation.

The event brought together over 60 senior business representatives to discuss the challenges they face in global trade. Participants were from small and large enterprises, from developed, developing and least-developed countries and from a variety of sectors. The meeting was the second Trade Dialogues event with the business community, and was held at the request of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and the B20, the business arm of the G20, and facilitated by the WTO. The main topics of discussion – sustainable development, e-commerce, facilitating investment, and small businesses – stemmed from the trade priorities identified at the Business Forum held in December 2017 alongside the WTO’s 11th Ministerial Conference (MC11) in Buenos Aires.

WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said:

“I am delighted to welcome the business community to the WTO – and to see such an excellent attendance from around the world. The message of support for the trading system was striking. Businesses clearly see the value of the system – and the need to keep working to strengthen it for the years to come. The level of engagement from the private sector in the WTO keeps rising, and I think that today’s event will provide real food for thought for WTO members as they take forward their work. I also heard a strong desire from business to keep this conversation going and to keep building this constructive partnership. I thank the ICC and the B20 for their initiative in organising this session.”

The Director-General addressed the opening session of the event, which was followed by four break-out sessions where participants engaged in a focused dialogue in small groups on topics identified by the business community as priorities. These issues included sustainable development, e-commerce, investment facilitation, and micro, small and medium-sized enterprises. Each of the four groups took up one of these themes for discussion. During the sessions, the business representatives also heard updates on the work conducted at the WTO in these areas since MC11.

The sessions were chaired by four “discussion leaders”:

• Sunil Bharti Mittal, Chairman, International Chamber of Commerce
• Paul Polman, ICC Chairman-elect
• Daniel Funes de Rioja , B20 Chair
• Fernando Landa, B20 Policy Sherpa

At a working lunch, the discussion leaders shared with all participants the outcomes of their discussions in the working sessions. At the final session, the discussion leaders and other participants presented the main messages from the working sessions with WTO members. DG Azevêdo and the Chairman of the WTO General Council, Ambassador Junichi Ihara, also attended this session.

A summary of the issues raised at the meeting was provided by the ICC and B20 and is available here.

Sunil Mittal said:

“The digital economy is changing the composition, nature and speed of global trade leading to policy friction – today’s trade rules reflect 20th century patterns of trade. With the size of e-commerce, touching US$ 25 trillion, digital infrastructure is a key determinant required by SMEs in developing countries to be a part of the global value chain. There is a need to focus on bridging the digital divide in a meaningful manner to initiate the negotiations. Without addressing the problems of SMEs in a digital environment, it will further marginalize them.”

Paul Polman said:

“Governments are increasingly making plans to align global trading policies with national development approaches, to accelerate progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals. It is critical that new forms of innovation and cooperation continue to be explored, amongst business, government and multilateral institutions. That is why Dialogues – such as today’s – are necessary. They can help us accelerate and ultimately achieve a global transition towards a more sustainable growth economy.”

John W.H. Denton AO, Secretary General, International Chamber of Commerce, said:

“The global business community’s position on trade is unambiguous. Far from being a zero-sum game where some countries take advantage of others, rules-based trade has lifted incomes and created jobs around the world. Today we risk returning to a pre-WTO system where might equals right – jeopardising the future economic security of billions of people.”

Daniel Funes de Rioja said:

“A rules-based system that ensures open trade is crucial for development. The WTO has a central role as the guardian of this system. We need to ensure that its rules and mechanisms can be updated, so it can react to the changing times. We need an ambitious and positive agenda here, which ensures that we are prepared to avoid trade frictions that can lead to economic disruptions. The B20 is ready to play its full role to that end.”

Fernando Landa said:

“SMEs are fundamental for economic and social development, particularly for developing economies. The dimensions discussed today at the Trade Dialogues include capacity building, capitalizing on existing tools, improving access to information on regulations, building a digital presence, which in turn will help access to trade finance, and addressing TBTs and SPS and any form of compliance rules.”

The companies and organizations represented at the event were:

• Adidas
• Agility/Shipa Freight
• Alibaba
• Amazon
• Apple
• Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers & Exporters Association
• Boniswa Corporate Solutions
• Brazilian National Confederation of Industry
• BT Group plc
• Business Europe
• Cargill
• Ceibos-Group
• Coalition of Services Industries
• Consumers International
• Deloitte
• DHL
• DIAGEO
• Dow Chemical Company
• eBay
• Embraer
• Ericsson
• FastTrackTrade
• Federation of German Industries
• FedEx
• FIATA
• Google
• Grasshoppers Lk
• Huawei
• IKEA
• Keidanren
• Kenyan Private Sector Alliance
• Liwwa
• MasterCard
• Microsoft
• National Foreign Trade Council
• National Petrochemical Industrial Company (Natpet)
• Nestlé
• Nokia
• Rags2Riches
• Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs
• Samsung
• Syngenta
• UPS
• Vodafone
• Walmart
• World Association of Investment Promotion Agencies
• World Economic Forum

Background

The first dialogue was held at the WTO in May 2016 at the request of the ICC and B20. It identified a number of pressing business issues. The ICC and B20 subsequently submitted their recommendations.

Source:wto.org

 

Tin bài 08/6

97/ Azevêdo highlights ‘significant progress’ on trade finance, outlines further actions

Speaking at a meeting of the WTO Working Group on Trade, Debt and Finance on 8 June, Director-General Roberto Azevêdo highlighted the significant progress made in improving access to trade finance, in response to the persistent gaps in provision which affect small businesses and poorer countries in particular. DG Azevêdo outlined progress in a number of areas, including working with partners to enhance existing trade finance facilitation programmes. In 2016, these programmes supported around $22 billion in trade transactions. In 2018 they are set to reach over $35 billion — an increase of more than 50% in just two years. Looking forward, he said: “I am confident that some of the processes and discussions that we have initiated can deliver even more positive outcomes in the period ahead.” He pointed to the “strong coalition” which has been built on this work, bringing a wide range of partners to the table, including the International Finance Corporation, the Financial Stability Board and the regional development banks. Discussions with these partners will continue, including at the Annual Meetings of the IMF and World Bank in Bali, Indonesia, in October.

Ambassador Haqjo,

Excellencies,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Good morning.

I am pleased to join you today – and to have the chance to update on trade finance issues.

The huge and persistent gaps in trade finance represent a significant barrier to trade. I have heard the issue raised in many different contexts. In fact, it was raised during the Trade Dialogues session with business just yesterday.

According to the World Economic Forum, trade finance represents one of the top three obstacles to exporting for half of the countries in the world.

The Asian Development Bank estimates that the global gap in trade finance is about $1.5 trillion. This represents the amount of trade finance that has been requested by importers and exporters, but rejected. In many developing countries, the alternatives to bank financing are scarce, so when rejected by banks, the transaction is abandoned.

Let me give you an example of why this is so important.

In Burkina Faso, global banks historically provided pre-shipment finance of the cotton crop. This is vital as the crop accounts for a quarter of total exports and 40% of the rural population’s income.

However, in recent years banks have withdrawn.

Thankfully the International Finance Corporation and Islamic Trade Finance Corporation stepped in. However, they still require participation by partner banks to support the transactions. They convinced one bank to engage, and together financed 80% of the cotton crop.

If in coming years no bank is willing to participate, the risk is that cotton exports would fall dramatically, and cut off the dominant income source for approximately three million people.

That is why we have to act. If we don’t, then such risks would proliferate – and opportunities would be lost.

WTO members have acknowledged this situation – a situation that affects poorer countries and smaller companies disproportionately. And I know that this issue is being examined by members who are working on MSMEs.

In 2016 we issued a publication on trade finance, which spelled out some of the potential actions that we could take in response. Those actions included:

1. supporting multilateral development banks’ trade finance facilitation programmes by way of advocacy and mobilization;
2. reducing the knowledge gap regarding trade finance products, by encouraging our partners to increase their training programmes;
3. opening a dialogue with trade finance regulators; and
4. continuing to track and monitor trade finance gaps.

I have been working with a range of partners to push these points forward.

So how are we doing?

We have built a strong coalition around these issues.

I have been in contact with the heads of the regional development banks, the CEO of the IFC Philippe Le Houérou, the Chair of the Financial Stability Board Mark Carney, and many others.

Members have also discussed this issue on a number of occasions, including at the Aid for Trade Global Review last year.

I think that this effort to raise awareness is starting to bear fruit. We have seen a number of important steps taken across the board in recent years.

The report produced by the Expert Group on Trade Finance, which has been distributed to you, provides a comprehensive look at these developments. I want to thank Marc Auboin for his work in putting this report together and supporting our work in this area.

So let me highlight some specific areas where progress has been made – following the action plan we set out in 2016.

The first area is about enhancing existing trade finance facilitation programmes.

We are working with our partners here – and we have seen multilateral development banks stepping in to increase their financing or guarantees in the poorest parts in the world. In 2016, these programmes supported around $22 billion in trade transactions. In 2017, this amount increased to $30 billion. And in 2018, it is estimated that over $35 billion of trade will be supported by these programmes. This would amount to an increase of more than 50% compared to just two years ago.

This is very significant progress.

The Asian Development Bank supported trade transactions from more than 2,800 SMEs last year in countries such as Cambodia, Myanmar and Bangladesh. And they continue to see very strong demand.

We are also seeing banks working more closely together to provide better coverage. In July 2017, the heads of the Islamic Trade Finance Corporation and IFC met at the WTO and signed a memorandum of understanding to pursue joint financing in Africa.

All of this is very positive. However, clearly much more needs to be done.

The second area is about addressing knowledge gaps in local financial institutions.

And here again we have some encouraging news.

Multilateral development banks have boosted their capacity building work on trade finance, in collaboration with the ICC. Together they trained nearly 2,600 people in 2017 – across 85 countries.

This is very impressive. I hope that we can further expand the reach of these programmes by bringing new partners on board.

This is why the third element is so important – and that is increasing dialogue with regulators.

The gaps in trade finance emerged in the aftermath of the financial crisis. The crisis forced global banks to re-evaluate their risk calculus. And this was not only due to exposure and risks of default, it was also very much related to the changes in regulation that followed the crisis.

A renewed regulatory dialogue could help here. It could build capacity in smaller, local banks to respond to the trade finance demand. And it could help to encourage larger banks to return to markets that they withdrew from after the financial crisis.

The heads of the FSB, IFC and I agreed that our organizations should work together to see how we could address some of these aspects. In fact, the FSB has made progress in the past couple of years in updating and clarifying regulatory expectations – notably on anti-money laundering and know-your-customer regulations.

We are also looking at the possibility of joint technical assistance missions, helping to build knowledge on trade finance and on compliance requirements.

All of this is still work in progress.

Finally, the fourth area of action was improving the monitoring of trade finance provision.

The Asian Development Bank’s global gap study continues to improve – thanks to the collaboration of an increasing number of institutions.

This includes the WTO and other multilateral institutions, and professional associations such as the ICC, Factor Chain International, the Berne Union of Export Credit Agencies and others.

The last available study benefited from the participation from 515 banks and more than 1,300 companies, of which a large number were SMEs.

We will keep developing these partnerships. So it is important to keep improving our dialogue on these issues – including through meetings like this.

That’s where things stand today. I think we can reflect on some very important progress.

And I am confident that some of the processes and discussions that we have initiated can deliver even more positive outcomes in the period ahead.

So we need to continue providing momentum to this work.

And of course you have a central role to play.

You can be advocates of this issue – and I invite you to do precisely that.

Moreover, your feedback, views and information on best practices can help advance these conversations, and find concrete areas where we may be able to make a real difference.

So congratulations on the achievements so far. Let’s continue working together to ensure that trade finance remains high on the agenda.

Thank you.

Source:wto.org

 

98/ CPTPP legislation coming before the end of summer: Champagne

The legislation needed to ratify the pending Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership trade agreement will be presented to the House of Commons before it rises for the summer, Canada’s international trade minister says.

In testimony before the House of Commons trade committee Tuesday morning, François-Philippe Champagne told MPs the Canadian government wants to be in the “first wave” of countries to ratify the trade deal.

He said Canadian officials plan to work “expeditiously” to get the legislation passed. The last possible sitting day of the House of Commons is June 22.

Champagne told MPs the legislation will not be passed before the summer, adding he plans to respect the parliamentary process.

The minister’s comments come just weeks after Champagne presented the full text of the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership agreement, formerly the Trans Pacific Partnership, in the House of Commons May 23.

The 11 member nations signed the deal March 8 during a ceremony in Chile.

The Trudeau government has been pressured by stakeholders, notably export dependent farm groups, who want Canada to ratify the trade agreement as quickly as possible. In a letter to Champagne last week, the Canadian Agri-Food Trade Alliance warned the minister that “the race is on as other CPTPP members are moving quickly to ratify the agreement.”

Mexico has already ratified the multi-lateral trade deal, with Japan expected to have its ratification process concluded by the end of June.

“Australia tabled the treaty in its Parliament and vows to expedite ratification,” the letter reads, while “Malaysia and Chile are both expected to ratify quickly. New Zealand, Singapore, Peru, Vietnam and Brunei are all working to ratify the CPTPP by the fall.”

The multi-nation trade deal is seen as a critical piece is Canadian trade policy by exporters who are grappling with ongoing uncertainty over the renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement and increased American protectionism.

Source: iPolitics

 

Tin bài 09/6

99/ Delivering a safer world

A common expectation of improved safety in almost all aspects of our lives, from safer workplaces, to safer consumer products and food, highlights an important role for accreditation.

The challenge now faced by employers, businesses and government is to ensure that those expectations become reality. It’s a substantial task, made considerably easier thanks to International Standards that keep people safer in their homes, at their workplaces, and on their journeys. Many of these work as part of a coherent system of ISO management standards, addressing sectors from information security (ISO/IEC 27001) and food safety (ISO 22000), to the recently-published ISO 45001 — Occupational health and safety.

International Standards reassure employers, workers and consumers alike, providing a tried and trusted answer to any organization looking to improve the efficiency and safety of its processes. For many, getting certified is a way of showing the world that your services or products are packing the power of standards. While certification is not compulsory, many choose to engage an independent expert to verify the procedures and processes that they have in place.

But what processes exist for making sure that independent experts, really are just that? The answer lies in accreditation, where certifying bodies are themselves assessed and approved to provide certification services. The organizations responsible for coordinating accreditation activities on a global scale, are the International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC) and the International Accreditation Forum (IAF). They’re also the people behind the annual world accreditation day, celebrated each year on June 9.

The Chairs of both organizations have reiterated the importance of  delivering a “safer world” and how accreditation can support  government, regulators and businesses, aiming to keep people safer in their work, their domestic life, their journeys and all other parts of their lives.

For further information, consult the World Accreditation Day site, where you will find further information from ILAC and the LAF, as well as a brochure that shows how accredited testing, inspection and certification is being used to deliver a safer world.

Source:iso.org

 

Tin bài 11/6

100/ Merkel and leaders of six multilateral agencies call for enhanced global cooperation

German Chancellor Angela Merkel hosted a meeting with the heads of six multilateral agencies on 11 June in Berlin to discuss ways to foster international economic cooperation to address global challenges and improve the prospects for inclusive and sustainable growth. WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo attended the meeting, alongside the heads of the ILO, IMF, OECD, World Bank and the African Development Bank. A joint press release was issued at the end of the meeting.

DG Azevêdo, speaking after the meeting, said:

“Rising trade tensions risk a major economic impact, undermining the strongest sustained period of trade growth since the financial crisis. They also pose a real systemic threat, risking far greater impacts in the longer term. We will continue working to resolve these tensions and to avoid further, damaging escalation which draws in new sectors, potentially harming more workers.

“While we work to resolve current issues, we must also enhance cooperation and improve our institutional structures to meet our members’ needs. Many would agree that the trading system is imperfect and that it needs reform. I would agree with that, but I would also say that the core principles of the system have tremendous value. They are the pillar on which many decades of stability, growth and development have been built. But we should also be seeking to strengthen and improve it, for the benefit of everyone. The best way to do this is through a new dialogue among leaders. We must find constructive ways of engaging and bringing leaders together. I commend the Chancellor for her efforts here. I look forward to working with her to this end.”

Source:wto.org

 

101/  DDG Wolff: This is the time to renew the multilateral trading system

The multilateral trading system needs renewal periodically and this is the time for engaging in the necessary effort, said Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff in an address to the International Relations Committee of the European Central Bank in Frankfurt on 11 June. He concluded: “With good will and effort, the world trading system can be updated and improved. It is essential to do so in order to have an effective functioning WTO for the economic well-being of the world.” This is what he said:

My purpose this evening is to outline where we are in the world of trade, given my own set of experiences and my current vantage point at the WTO, and to indicate where the international trading system could and should be. (Note: my remarks are personal, and not made on behalf of the WTO or its Members.)

There has not been a more interesting time in international trade since the founding of the World Trade Organization, 23 years ago.  Until the recent U.S. election and Brexit, for decades trade had not been the subject of mass media reporting, other than for the occasional additional negative story (e.g.: riots and tear gas at the 1999 WTO Ministerial Meeting in Seattle) .  Aside from the Financial Times, the Economist and some business publications, trade had ceased to be covered, not much of interest to mass circulation newspapers and other forms of media, often not covered regularly at all.  Now, all too often trade is front page news.

What has changed?  Why is trade so contentious?  First, technological change, automation, the information revolution, have caused major dislocations.  Globalization played its part as well.  The public does not blame smart phones for current conditions.  The default is to blame trade.  Whatever the reasons, the effect has been a rise of populism, nativism, nationalism in a number of countries.  How politicians react makes a difference too.  The leading candidates for the U.S. presidency in 2016 attacked international trade arrangements.  The majority of Americans support free trade agreements, yet this has no current effect. The new U.S. President proceeded once in office in a manner dramatically at odds with the approach of all of his predecessors.  This caused more than a few to question the U.S. commitment to the multilateral trading system.  At present, the U.S. president is the only current head of government of a major economy to say that all prior trade agreements are bad, and that he is unconcerned by the prospect of a trade war.  Perhaps he is alone in all of history in saying so.  He is also the only President to suggest the complete elimination of tariffs with the largest Western economies as an alternative to a threatened rebalancing with U.S. tariffs rising to match presumed foreign market closure.

To make sense of the current turmoil, it is necessary to separate out what is actually happening from the headlines in the news.  The picture is decidedly mixed, but there are many positive factors and opportunities, as well as negative factors, many in the form of challenges to the world trading system.  Clearly, the system in key respects is considered by most WTO members short of what it should be (although there is no current consensus on what that end point is).  Nevertheless, it is entirely possible to discern possible paths forward.

Listing the positives

First, the current headlines ignore the reality that world trade continues to grow at a respectable clip of roughly 4.7% last year, after just growing at a rate of just 1.8% in 2016.  It is forecast to rise at a rate slightly above 4% this year.  To date the system has been remarkably resilient — the trading rules held throughout the global financial crisis, although that memory is fading.  Tariffs stayed low and contractually bound, and competitive currency depreciation did not become the rule.  Yes, that was then and this is now, but the system is at present still largely holding.  There are, however, signs of weakness – presumably to some degree a result of current stress over trade.  Foreign direct investment has fallen off by 25% in 2017.  However, threatened massive trade restrictions are actually not in place.

Second, progress has continued. Additional improvements have been made in the world trading system in the years following the global financial crisis:

• A new trade facilitation agreement was signed and entered into force, which when fully implemented could reduce trade costs by an average of 14.3% and boost global trade by up to $1 trillion per year, with the biggest gains in the poorest countries,
• Agreement was reached to ban agricultural export subsidies, and
• Agreement was reached on an expansion of the list of duty-free IT products to adjust for advances in technology.

True, these measures have not been endorsed by the current U.S. Administration, but nor have they been disavowed. While unpredictability is a tool used by the new Administration, there is no reason to believe that these agreements would be rejected by it.

Third, in December last year, The Miracle of Buenos Aires (half loaves but no fishes) occurred.  At Buenos Aires, trade ministers issued an important set of declarations:

• 71 countries, accounting for 3/4 of global GDP agreed to meet and seek common ground with respect to rules to cover government measures relating to electronic commerce and are now doing so.
• 58 countries accounting for 3/4 of world exports agreed to meet and seek common ground with respect to domestic regulation services and are now doing so.
• 70 countries accounting for 3/4 of world trade agreed to meet and seek common ground with respect to investment facilitation and are now doing so.
• 85 countries accounting for 3/4 of world trade agreed to meet and seek common ground with respect to the needs of micro and medium and small enterprises (MSMES) and are now doing so.
• While there was no immediate agreement on curtailing fisheries subsidies, a firm commitment was adopted to reach agreement by the next ministerial (scheduled for 2019).

The WTO Ministerial at Buenos Aires was, due to these new and renewed initiatives, remarkably successful.
This is not to say that new agreements will be concluded in the near term.  What starts as a discussion will continue as a negotiation at a pace the participants desire. As the initiatives are open to all, this could include most if not all the WTO members.  This means that the WTO can and very likely will be updated to address a number of current and future needs of international trade.  What is important is that there is movement in a good direction for the world trading system.  A restart at seeking agreement on key aspects of agriculture is also a shared objective.  These efforts have the potential of constituting an important breakthrough.
Other positive aspects of Buenos Aires: the North-South divide was by no means universal.  Agricultural proposals were, for example, made jointly by the EU and Brazil, and the U.S. together with Kenya and Uganda.

A fourth positive can be found in the ongoing work of the WTO.  National product standards are notified and discussed when they are still in draft form, comments can be taken on board; the use of international standards is fostered, and sanitary and phyto-sanitary regulations are addressed.  Technical assistance is made available to developing countries through the Standards and Trade Development Facility to facilitate developing country exports through an enhanced ability of these countries to meet standards.  The Government Procurement Agreement is another positive example of WTO activities.  Some new adherents to the Agreement have joined seeing the benefit of its assistance in fighting domestic corruption.

Last but not least on the list of positives, there is the WTO accession process.  Twenty-two countries are seeking membership.  They are a living testament to the value of the WTO.  The last two countries to join were Afghanistan and Liberia, both damaged by war and the second also by the outbreak of Ebola.  Those in the current queue for entry include Bosnia Herzegovina, Sudan, South Sudan, Timor L’este, and Serbia.  Many of these countries seek to integrate their economies into the global economy not just to raise the standard of living of their peoples but to bring peace and stability.

Challenges

(1) Current and threatened trade restrictive measures

There are a series of events vying for consideration for the position of top of the list of current challenges to the world trading system.

I can start with the U.S. invocation of its domestic section 232 national security authority as well as the national security exception to the WTO rules in imposing 25% tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from selected countries.

That there are restrictions imposed on steel imports is nothing new.  Steel is a capital intensive good.  Capacity utilization can affect profitability dramatically.  Governments build steel mills often in disregard of likely demand. Industrial policy as a rule generally results in the creation of overcapacity.  It is the invocation of the national security exception that is rare in these circumstances.  Moreover, selectively imposing restrictions on the trade of allies for stated reasons of national security is unprecedented.  Retaliation and threats of counter-retaliation also break new ground.  Roughly $30 billion of trade is involved. The systemic threat comes from the chain reaction of initial and retaliatory measures, the potential for this interfering with co-operation on other matters and even more from the precedent created in invoking national security as a justification for the action, which has no clear bounds.

Concerns over an expanding resort to national security as a justification for trade actions has been heightened since another product, autos, even more important to world trade, is now under investigation by the United States government under the same domestic national security authority that was used in the case of steel and aluminum.  U.S. auto imports in 2017 were around $180 billion.  Were these imports to be subject to restrictions, the retaliation could add a like amount to total trade restrictions.  We are not used to talking about new trade restrictions in hundreds of billions of dollars of trade coverage.

The second headline grabbing trade event is the US intellectual charges and threatened measures against China.  Again, the threatened tariffs on both sides in multiples of $50 billion is eye-catching.

Before these two sets of measures and countermeasures mentioned above were being contemplated, the number one systemic threat was the impasse over the WTO’s Appellate Body appointment process.  The AB is designed to consist of 7 members.  The U.S. is blocking appointments as vacancies arise.  The AB currently consists of only four members.  As of the end of September, if the current impasse persists, there will be three members.  Three is the minimum needed to decide an appeal, and due to possible conflicts on the part of any remaining member and in general the heavy caseload, appeals as a practical matter may cease to be available.

This is not just a problem for parties to individual cases, there is a systemic risk.  It occurs as follows: WTO member A brings a case against WTO Member B.  Member A wins a decision of a dispute settlement panel.  It asks Member B to adjust its measures to bring them into conformity with B’s WTO obligations as determined by the panel.  B says it will not do so as it is appealing the panel decision.  But no appeal is possible as a practical matter. Member A then states that it will retaliate.  Member B then states that is will counter-retaliate.  A trade war ensues.  This would have been less incredible as a likely scenario were it not for the steel and aluminum and intellectual property matters just mentioned, and the threats and counter-threats that were issued in connection with them.

Why is the U.S. blocking appointments to the Appellate Body?  The U.S. asserts that the AB has overreached, acted beyond its authority, and in so doing destroyed the bargain upon which binding WTO dispute settlement was based.  The deal was that trade remedies would be available in limited, carefully crafted circumstances⁽¹⁾.  Enough of those involved in the negotiations at the end of the Uruguay Round negotiations in the early 1990s state that this is the case.  U.S. complaints about the conduct of the Appellate Body have been made consistently over three Republican administrations and one Democratic one.   In the eyes of informed observers, America’s grievance must be regarded as well-founded.

These three threats — over steel and aluminum, China IP retaliation and counter-retaliation, and the Appellate Body impasse – are the casi belli of what the press not unreasonably calls a potential “trade war”.  They are not the end of the list of challenges however.  These mask more fundamental issues.

(2) The Rise of China

Underlying the tensions in the system, alongside other causes, is the economic rise of China.  The experience of the rise of a major economy is not new in the post-WWII period.  The rise of a new economic power appears to inevitably involve trade friction. This was the case with respect to the rise of Japan in the last half of the 20th century. Around 1990, the 21st century was heralded as the coming Century of Japan.  Now, at some point in the not too distant future, China is seen as surpassing other economic powers to be the largest. There are of course major differences between the two cases.  The U.S. and the EU regarded Japan as an ally.  Japan was the stationary aircraft carrier for the American presence in Asia. China is sometimes called a “strategic competitor” but never an ally of the developed economies.  The Japanese market was closed to both trade and foreign investment during its rise.  Deng Xiaoping opened the Chinese market to foreign goods and foreign investment. The Chinese domestic market is far larger in scale and global importance than was Japan’s and the announced intention of the Chinese leadership is to be dominant in its own market as well as abroad with respect to a number of industries of the future are also important differences.  The WTO rules were not well-crafted to deal with these issues.

(3) The Need for Leadership

As noted, the U.S. had not abdicated a leading role in the WTO, as had appeared to be the case through mid-December of last year.  Rather, while participating actively in the several of the new initiatives emerging from Buenos Aires and in the regular work of the WTO, for the future it has an agenda with a focus that is different than that of prior U.S. administrations.  It seeks to reform the system.  In my view, its actions do not indicate a desire to destroy the WTO.

Traditional trade liberalization initiatives, such as tariff elimination for more IT products or environmental goods, are not mentioned at present as U.S. objectives, which they were during prior US Administrations.  The U.S. is seeking compliance with existing transparency requirements; further disciplines on subsidies; with respect to those claiming a need for exceptions from the rules due to their development needs, differentiation by level of size and competitiveness; curtailing what it views as the overreach by WTO dispute settlement (adding to the rights and obligations of members beyond what was negotiated); improvements in the domestic regulation of services,  market access at least for agricultural goods; and new rules to foster e-commerce.

While this is a strong positive agenda, the United States is not casting itself in the 70-year accustomed role of guarantor and motiving force for the multilateral trading system.

This leaves a gap for other potential leaders to fill if they wish to do so.

The European Union is the prime candidate.  It has, however, to deal with the problems caused by Brexit as well as internal issues.  Moreover, it has invested much more heavily in an extensive number of bilateral arrangements than it has in the multilateral trading system.  It nevertheless may grasp and take on board the imperative to reform and perhaps recommit more strongly to the multilateral trading system.

China, the world’s largest manufacturing and exporting country would be a natural candidate but has not seemed to be willing to accept this role.  This is despite a strong statement endorsing the multilateral trading system by President Xi Jinping in 2017.

An article in the Financial Times called upon the “middle countries” to lead. At least two of these are EU Member States — France and Germany — and therefore must lead from within that bloc.  The FT also named Japan.  In fact, Japan was superb as a leader and partner in the crafting of the 12-country Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement.  With respect to current issues at the WTO, it has been working hard at composing differences on various subjects, but apparently has not stepped forward at the level of Prime Minister to give the same priority to the multilateral trading system that it gave to the regional arrangement.

Other middle countries do not appear to feel that they have the ability to provide broad leadership.

This said, there are some bright spots, such as Australia, Singapore and Japan teaming up to move the discussion forward on rules for e-commerce.  So, new leadership may be emerging incrementally in selected areas.

(4) Declining Trust

Compliance with rules, whether at the individual or national level, relies heavily on self-restraint. It is what makes civilization possible. Dispute settlement, retaliation, criticism by others, these are mechanisms kept in reserve to achieve performance expected to be consistent with international obligations.  The willingness of governments to obey the rules depends heavily on the belief that others will do likewise.  Similarly, the willingness of governments to enter new trade agreements depends on trust.  It is inconceivable that there is not some erosion of trust currently although it is clear that trust has not completely evaporated.  This is a rapidly evolving picture.

(5) Declining Certainty

World trade and investment depend heavily on stability of the regulatory environment — that tariffs and rules governing imports and investment will not be variable, but rather will be predictable. Certainty is diminishing.  This cannot but have a negative effect on business confidence, and therefore on investment and trade.

(6) Underinvestment by stakeholders

There has been substantial underinvestment by WTO members and by the private sector (businesses and civil society) in adapting the international trading system to meet current challenges as they evolved.  In preparation for results at the Buenos Aires Ministerial, other than the host, Argentine President Macri, as far as I know no president or prime minister reached out to a peer in another country to accomplish anything. No business or other interest, again as far as I know, reached out to the head of its national government to press it to achieve a particular objective at the WTO.  What one sows, one reaps.  There was no harvest of new agreements at Buenos Aires, but fortunately the opportunities created for the future were substantial.

(7) Failure to have adequate domestic adjustment policies

During times of rapid technological change, domestic policies, not just trade policies must provide a cushion, to help the workforce and communities adapt.  The pace of change has only quickened.  Smart phones replaced entire industries and caused other industries to grow.  Shifts in demand for various skill sets have occurred very quickly.  We are now apparently racing toward singularity – when artificial intelligence (AI) equals human intelligence.  We do not have to reach that point for there to be major economic dislocations and vast needs for adjustment. Going forward, it will be even more illogical to blame international trade for the problems caused.  But trade may take its share of calumny –politics make trade all too easy a target.

Shortcomings in the current world trading system

No set of trading arrangements are perfect for all circumstances, particularly with the passage of time.  It has now been over seven decades since the original rules were negotiated.  The world has changed substantially.

As one of the leaders who participated in the creation of the WTO reacted when I listed shortcomings in the current rules: “The architects of the multilateral trading system cannot have been expected to be so prescient as to foresee [these changes].  They were addressing the problems of the day as they saw them.  In fact, the surprising thing perhaps is that the rules that they designed proved to be quite flexible and adaptable to huge changes in the technological and the political environment.  But they are definitely looking dated now in a number of areas and in my view, it is time for [rethinking them] and [putting into place] a new design.”

Some issues were thought to have been put to rest when the WTO was created.  One was unilateralism.  The change in the U.S. government’s attitude could not have been anticipated.  It was not to be expected that the guardian and creator of the current international trading rules would belittle the rules as not being “religious obligations”, and assert its freedom to act accordingly. Nor was it foreseen that the national security exception would be a clause invoked often and for broad swaths of trade.  It is not that the United States had an unblemished record of adherence to multilateral trade rules, but it had never treated them with disdain.

Nor was it anticipated that China after accession to the WTO would continue and accelerate industrial policies that are intended to change trade patterns to the deep concern of others.  The assumption was that the role of state-owned enterprises would diminish rather than increase.

It was not anticipated:

• That the world’s largest trading country would as a matter of principle claim to have developing country status for potential preferential treatment under the rules.
• That WTO-unregulated and under-regulated domestic subsidies, agricultural and industrial, would be a dominant cause of distortions of international trade.
• That the exception for FTAs would cover much more of world trade beyond local, geographically limited, regions.
• That technology-driven globalization would spread the benefits of trade so widely as to lead to greatly increased engagement in trade rule-making, greatly complicating decision making.
• That the Appellate Body would make decisions that appear to be based on a belief that trade remedies (trade defense instruments) would fall within a narrow exception to the rules to be continuously constrained.

And while it is not the problem of the moment, it was not anticipated

• That the provision prohibiting the use of exchange rates to frustrate trade liberalization would be a dead letter.

A path forward

While crisis management is essential, it is far from sufficient. Idealism (the historic link made by political leaders of liberal trading arrangements to world peace) is no longer the guiding star for the major trading countries. What is needed is pragmatism and re-dedication to multilateralism through deeds. The widespread underinvestment in the multilateral trading system is a course that cannot be continued.  The system needs renewal periodically and this is the time for engaging in the necessary effort.

There needs to be a new Geneva consensus, not a Washington consensus, either as that term was used until the last presidential election (free market), or how it might be used now (nationalistic), and not a Beijing consensus (with more of a role for the state in directing economic planning) either.

In late May, at the OECD, French President Emmanuel Macron announced that it was time for the world’s biggest economic powers to start talks on reshaping the WTO’s rules to prevent current tensions spiraling into trade wars.  He called for the EU, United States, China and Japan to draw up a blueprint for WTO reform in time for the next G-20 meeting in Argentina at the end of the year.  Macron stated:  ”The new rules must meet the current challenges of world trade: massive state subsidies creating distortions of global markets, intellectual property, social rights and climate protection,”

In response, the WTO Director General Roberto Azevêdo endorsed the need for reform.  “We have been saying for a long time that the system is far from perfect. That it needs to be improved.”  He noted that many discussions took place among trade ministers on the functioning of the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB), overcapacity of production, and protection of intellectual property. He concluded: “So there are many topics where improvements are possible. Members decide what the priorities are.”

Besides the Macron suggestion of major trading powers coming together, there is a separate exercise already under way that is trilateral – where Japan, the EU and the United States seek to coordinate their respective approaches to overcapacity, domestic subsidies, and industrial policies that distort trade.

For its part, the U.S. announced a reform agenda at the Buenos Aires Ministerial in December 2017 that focused on compliance with existing obligations (particularly with respect to commitments to provide transparency through notification of measures), a review of differentiation among those WTO members claiming development status and preventing attempts to obtain through litigation what could not be gained through negotiation.

The optimal path forward would be to bring policies and measures that affect trade back within the rules to a greater extent. With respect to new subject areas, the Joint Declaration Initiatives at Buenos Aires are a good beginning.  With respect to a number of the major areas of contention that pose potential systemic risks, solutions can be found through interpretation of existing rules to some degree and through adoption of new rules.  Either way, a consensus for reform needs to take shape.

Part of the way forward is to renew the WTO Appellate Body with sufficient change so that it has full legitimacy in the eyes of the WTO Membership as a whole.  That is absent at present.  The WTO appellate function will almost surely wither absent a breakthrough.  As noted, the consequences of that occurring will be very damaging to world trade.

The challenges can be met, with pragmatism and good will.  The attitude has to be one of working for the common good as part of individual member’s self-interest.  There cannot be progress without a shared vision and abandonment of any insistence on threshold demands, of “me before you” — satisfy my interests first as a precondition for engagement.

The present is not the first international economic crisis.  There are a number of relevant examples.  One is what happened in 1971.  The international monetary system could no longer function as it had.  The dollar was tied to gold, and European central banks were cashing in their dollars.  The U.S. was running out of gold.  The dollar was the world’s reserve currency, and the U.S. did not have the freedom to change the value of the dollar, despite its balance of payments problems. America’s trading partners were opposed to seeing the dollar devalued.  On August 15, 1971, the U.S. imposed a 10% surcharge on imports and closed the gold window.  The import surcharge was technically inconsistent with U.S. obligations under the trading rules of the time — the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (the GATT).   As a result, U.S. measure was condemned almost unanimously by the members of a GATT working party.  The U.S. defense was that it was justified under the rules to impose more stringent measures – quantitative restrictions.  This was not a legal defense at all.  Another parallel with current events is that the U.S. President’s proclamation was issued under a World War I national security statute.  However, the U.S. did not seek to defend its action in the GATT proceedings as necessary for national security reasons.

As part of its package of measures, the U.S. made demands of its three major trading partners – the European Communities, Japan and Canada — for unilateral unreciprocated concessions.  Negotiations ensued that quickly resulted in a stalemate.

At the Smithsonian Institution in Washington on December 18, 1971, an accord was reached that allowed the U.S. dollar to be devalued.  The Smithsonian Agreement led within a relatively short time to agreement on a floating exchange rate system.  The trade talks eventually led to the launch in September 1973 of the Tokyo Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations. The result in 1979 was the first GATT nontariff trade agreements and further trade liberalization.

In short, a crisis, accompanied by unilateral U.S. action inconsistent with the trade rules of the time, led to reforms.  The crisis and how it was managed led to a better place for the world economy.  Can that happen again?  It is possible.  As the American humorist Mark Twain said, “History does not repeat itself, but it often rhymes.”

With good will and effort, the world trading system can be updated and improved.  It is essential to do so, in order to have an effective functioning WTO for the economic well-being of the world.

Footnotes

1. Trade defense was almost always viewed by academia as the black sheep of the family of trade agreement provisions (the relative to be hidden away and shunned), rather than a contractual and equal right and a politically necessary escape valve.  That valve was increasingly blocked by GATT and WTO dispute settlement decisions and then a wave of populism hit, and the international trading system is less prepared to resist the shocks.   I believe we can get to a better place, but as time goes by, positions harden, and maybe it may be naïve to think that there is a solution.  I would like to see the AB saved because I believe it makes institutional sense, but it would need to be restored to the original intent (which is entirely ascertainable) to survive.

Source:wto.org

 

102/ WTO hosts course on priority issues for least-developed countries

The first training course for least-developed countries (LDCs) to have simultaneous interpretation in English and French got under way at the WTO on 11 June 2018. A total of 29 government officials from 24 LDCs across the world are participating in the five-day course entitled “Priority Issues for LDCs in the Multilateral Trading System”.

The objective of the course is to deepen the participants’ understanding of issues of key interest to LDCs in the multilateral trading system. These include special and differential treatment, preferential market access in goods and services, technical assistance and capacity-building. Participants will also be briefed on the status of trade negotiations following the WTO’s Eleventh Ministerial Conference, which took place in Buenos Aires in December 2017, and will have an opportunity to interact with LDC delegates based in Geneva.

Jean-Christophe Diatta, Principal Customs Inspector from Senegal, said: “This course will help us strengthen our understanding of the multilateral trading system, in particular how to use its tools in a more efficient and autonomous way to foster growth and prosperity within our countries. Of particular interest to me are customs valuation issues and the implementation of the WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement.”

Another course participant, Sumaiya Zabeen, from the Tariff Commission of the Ministry of Commerce, Bangladesh, said: “I want to learn about the existing flexibilities for LDCs in the WTO and how our government can use them. This course is particularly timely as we are currently working towards Bangladesh’s graduation from LDC status.”

The course was opened by the Director of the Development Division, Mr Shishir Priyadarshi. In his address, he called on participants to use the various sessions to improve their understanding of issues that matter to LDCs as this will help them develop national strategies to further integrate into the multilateral trading system.

The course — jointly organised by the WTO’s Development Division and Institute for Training and Technical Cooperation (ITTC) — represents an intermediate (“level 2”) training activity within the WTO’s progressive learning strategy. This course is taking place for the third consecutive year, reflecting the continued priority given to LDCs in  the WTO’s trade-related technical assistance activities.

Source:wto.org

 

103/ Calling all creatives! The #mycrazyidea Design Contest is now open

To celebrate World Standards Day, IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission), ISO (International Organization for Standardization) and ITU (International Telecommunication Union) are organizing a drawing and video contest where you can win up to 1 500 Swiss francs. The competition is open to all countries and will close on 30 July 2018.

To participate, think of a problem in your community, something that could be better. Now, imagine that you have the latest technology (robotics, artificial intelligence, smart manufacturing, virtual reality, etc.) at your disposal. How could you use this technology paired up with international standards to solve the problem?

The #mycrazyidea competition is inspired by the 2018 World Standards Day theme “International Standards and the Fourth Industrial Revolution”. The day will draw attention to the technologies that are blurring the boundaries between the digital and the real world, and the role of international standards in enabling their positive development.

Follow the competition’s Facebook, Twitter and Instagram pages for live updates and interactive guidance for contestants. The winning design will be decided by public voting.

Since 1970, 14 October has been dedicated to celebrating international standards. Coordinated by IEC, ISO and ITU, World Standards Day celebrates the collaborative efforts of the thousands of public- and private-sector experts that dedicate their time and expertise to the development of international standards.

Source:iso.org

 

104/ WTO members focus on subsidies for fishing in overexploited stocks at June meetings

WTO members in the Negotiating Group on Rules on 11-14 June held their second cluster of meetings on fisheries subsidies this year, where they exchanged views and information on subsidies for fishing in overexploited stocks. Members also updated the current negotiating texts with a streamlined chapter on definitions in preparation for future text-based negotiations.

Following a similar structure to the first cluster of meetings held in May, the June meetings started with a technical session where members and experts from fisheries management organizations presented information on fish stock assessment processes and experiences. Members then held a thematic discussion focused on issues arising from disciplines on subsidies for fishing in overfished stocks, including special and differential treatment for developing country and least developed country (LDC) members. Time was allotted for bilateral meetings among members as well.

Members also worked on streamlining various proposals related to definitions of terms and concepts that appear in the negotiating texts. The latest version of the document containing the streamlined texts, including those prepared in the run up to the 11th Ministerial Conference (MC11) held last December in Buenos Aires, is available here.

“The discussion brought back to light the many complex issues related to subsidies for fishing in overfished stocks, which will need to be resolved for us to make progress in our work,” the chair of the Negotiating Group, Ambassador Roberto Zapata Barradas (Mexico), said at the concluding session of the meeting. “I am heartened by the high level of engagement and new suggestions from some members throughout the discussion.”

As outlined in the agreed work programme, the next cluster of meetings will be held on 23-25 July to discuss subsidies for illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing. The chair said that before then, he would be inviting interested delegations for consultations over the next steps beyond the current work programme, which ends in July. Several members said they would like to return to text-based negotiations after the August summer break, noting that members had committed at the 11th Ministerial Conference (MC11) to adopting an agreement by the next Ministerial Conference in 2019.

Source:wto.org

 

Tin bài 12/6

105/ New ISO standards for greener machine tools

When the topic of energy efficiency comes up, energy-efficient machine tools don’t immediately spring to mind. Yet machine tools contain motors and auxiliary components whose energy demand varies widely during machining operations. Happily, a new series of ISO standards can help measure energy supplied and improve machine design and performance.

Machine tools are complex power-driven industrial devices employed to manufacture ready-for-use parts or semi-finished products. Encompassing a whole array of tools for cutting and forming metal, wood and plastics, and all their accessories, machine tools are used by companies in a variety of sectors like the automotive industry, general machinery, precision engineering, the medical sector, transport, aerospace, and dies and mould.

Machine tools obviously use different forms of energy, such as electrical energy, compressed air, hydraulic energy, energy hidden in the cooling and lubrication system, etc. Therefore, the energy demand of a machine tool is considered as key data for investment, but does not stand alone. The performance of a machine tool is multidimensional regarding its economic value, its technical specification and its operating requirements, which are influenced by the specific application. Hence why the ecological footprint is a common challenge for all these products and, as natural resources become scarce, environmental performance criteria for machine tools need to be defined and the use of these criteria specified.

ISO has recently published the first two parts of a new International Standard for the environmental evaluation of machine tools, which proposes to analyse machine tools with regard to the delivered functions in order to highlight the commonalities in the huge variety of existing machine tool types.

ISO 14955-1, Machine tools – Environmental evaluation of machine tools – Part 1: Design methodology for energy-efficient machine tools, addresses the energy efficiency of machine tools during their working life. It identifies the main functions and machine tool components that are responsible for energy demand during the use phase. These components are then compared with previous components or with the state-of-the-art for their future improvement.

ISO 14955-2, Machine tools – Environmental evaluation of machine tools – Part 2: Methods for measuring energy supplied to machine tools and machine tool components, supports the energy-saving design methodology according to ISO 14955-1 by providing practical methods for measuring the energy supplied to machine tools.

Ralf Reines, Convenor of ISO/TC 39/WG 12 that developed the standards, explains: “This is, to my knowledge, the only standard concerning this topic that is tailored for machine tools. It covers the topic in a way that it can be applied to each and every machine tool, despite the fact that the product group of machine tools is extremely diverse, e.g. different technologies (such as milling, turning, grinding, laser processing, forming), processing of material (metal, wood, plastics), sizes (to produce parts the size of a tooth or to process gears for windmills of 10 m in diameter). The standard focuses on the relevant energy users to achieve a higher environmental performance without loosing in technical possibilities.”

According to the study Market Report 2016 by the German Machine Tool Builders’ Association, the world production of machine tools represents EUR 67.7 billion. The increasing demand for machinery and production systems to be more energy-efficient is a relatively new challenge for machine designers. Now, with the new ISO 14955 series, energy efficiency is likely to become an increasingly important quality attribute of modern machine tools.

ISO 14955-1 and ISO 14955-2 were developed by ISO technical committee ISO/TC 39, Machine tools, whose secretariat is held by SNV, ISO’s member for Switzerland. They can be purchased from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

Source:iso.org

 

106/ Agriculture Committee reviews US counter-notification of India’s farm subsidy spending

At a meeting of the Agriculture Committee on 11-12 June, WTO members discussed a counter-notification filed by the United States regarding India’s farm subsidies. Members also held their annual discussion on export competition and agreed to conclude the first three-year review of the elimination of export subsidies at the Committee meeting in September. In addition, members continued to review the administration of tariff rate quotas.

US counter-notification

The US counter-notification is the first-ever counter-notification to be submitted to the Agriculture Committee. It claims that India substantially under-reported its market price support (MPS) – government purchases of farm goods at guaranteed prices – for wheat and rice in its 2010-11 and 2013-14 notifications to the WTO (G/AG/W/174 and G/AG/W/178/Corr.1). According to the United States, this was a result of the methodology used by India to calculate its MPS.

The United States said India’s farm subsidy notifications lack details on spending at the sub-federal level and that it only reported the purchased production instead of all eligible production. India also reported spending in dollars instead of rupees. Furthermore, India had provided no detailed information on the value of production (VoP), which is the basis for determining “de minimis” limits. “De minimis” are the minimal amounts of domestic support that are allowed even though they distort trade.

India rejected the counter-notification and reiterated its methodology was consistent with WTO rules. It argued that it has consistently used dollars in its notifications since 1995-96. India said the WTO Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) does not define what constitutes eligible production and that the bonuses provided by some states to rice and wheat farmers are not substantive. There is no obligation to notify VoP under WTO rules, it said. In addition, all VoP data are available on seven websites. India said it was willing to submit VoP data provided other members agreed to do so.

Several members shared US concerns and worried this matter might reveal a systemic issue with India’s agriculture notifications. One member asked India to resubmit its MPS calculation, data on sub-federal bonuses and VoP figures. Another member disagreed with India’s interpretation of Annex 3 of the AoA (the definition of eligible production). The United States reminded India of its promise to submit VoP data soon.

Nairobi decision on eliminating export subsidies

Members undertook their third annual discussion on export competition since the December 2015 Nairobi Decision to eliminate export subsidies. The review was based on a revised background document by the WTO Secretariat (G/AG/W/125/Rev.8).

Out of the 18 members with export subsidy commitments, two members — New Zealand and Panama – had already phased out their export subsidies by the time of the Nairobi Decision. Three members – Australia, Norway and Israel – had their revised commitments to eliminate export subsidies certified.

Four other members – the European Union, Canada, South Africa and Switzerland-Liechtenstein – have circulated a revised schedule for eliminating farm export subsidies. The remaining members with export subsidy commitments – Brazil, Colombia, Indonesia, Mexico, Turkey, United States, Uruguay, Iceland and Venezuela – provided an update on their implementation  of the Nairobi decision. Colombia said it hoped to submit its revised schedule within  a week and Uruguay expected to be in a position to do so in the coming weeks.

The Cairns Group – a group of agricultural exporting nations lobbying for agricultural trade liberalization – circulated a document (G/AG/W/180) analysing export support policies and expressed confidence that members would soon fully implement the Nairobi decision.

Members also delved into the other areas of export competition covered by the decision – namely export finance, state trading entities and international food aid – and reviewed members’ questions (G/AG/W/176).

The Cairns Group report stressed the importance of the monitoring exercise and highlighted some remaining information gaps. The Committee Chair, Debora Cumes, and the Cairns Group called for more active engagement in responding to the WTO Secretariat’s Export Competition Questionnaire, in line with the annual review process under the Nairobi decision. Many members supported this call. The Chair urged members who had not yet replied to submit their answers to the questionnaire by the end of June.

Triennial export competition review

The Nairobi Decision on Export Competition instructed the Committee to carry out a triennial review of export competition “to ensure that no circumvention threatens export subsidy elimination commitments and to prevent non-commercial transactions from being used to circumvent such commitments”. Members agreed on the Chair’s proposal to conclude the first triennial review at the September meeting of the Committee since no member had provided additional comments since February.

Tariff rate quota administration

Members continued to review the Bali Decision on TRQ administration, with a view “to promote a continuing process of improvement in the utilisation of tariff rate quota”. Two papers – submitted by the Cairns Group (G/AG/W/179) and the European Union (G/AG/W/175) – triggered some preliminary discussions.

The Cairns Group’s paper highlighted questions to deepen reflection on future Committee work on the reasons for under-fill of tariff rate quotas (TRQs). Under the TRQ system, quantities inside a quota are supposed to be charged lower import duty rates than those outside. But in some cases, the tariffs applied outside the quota are lower than those inside. This explains why these quotas are sometimes “under-filled ” or not fully used.

The EU’s paper noted that not all members have the same obligations with respect to the “under-fill mechanism” contained in the Bali Decision and commented that this diminishes the mechanism’s potential effectiveness. One member noted that it would be useful to have a common understanding of the implications of paragraphs 13-15 of the Bali TRQ Decision, which define the scope of the TRQ review process.

Members agreed to continue discussing all elements at the next Committee meeting.

Regular review of agriculture policies

The Committee continued to review policies related to the three pillars of agriculture trade: market access, domestic support and export competition.

Nine new questions concerned Article 18.6 of the Agreement on Agriculture (review of the implementation of commitments). India’s policies on two products were questioned: rice and sugar. Canada asked the United State to explain why it issued new lenient policy terms for Commodity Credit Corporation Funds. Members also revisited questions from previous Committee meetings.  Members expressed concerns about developments relating to Canada’s new milk class and India’s pulses policies. All the questions are available in document G/AG/W/178.

Agriculture information management system (AG IMS)
As part of the exercise to improve transparency, the WTO Secretariat is improving the AG IMS database and will introduce new features in August. Training courses will be organized based on members’ requests.

Questions and answers regarding the issues mentioned above can be viewed in the AG IMS (search the AG-IMS ID in the section “Search Q&A Submitted since 1995″).

The next agriculture committee regular meeting is scheduled for 25-26 September.

Agriculture symposium

During a two-day symposium, held on 13-14 June, experts in agriculture policy and trade from both developed and developing countries presented information on the latest trends in the global food and agriculture economy, the implications for farmers, consumers, and businesses and future expectations. Participants exchanged ideas on four themes: the economic significance of agricultural trade; evolving trading patterns in agricultural products; products, prices and market participation; and the agricultural trade policy landscape.

Speakers noted that the food and agriculture landscape has dramatically evolved in the past 15 years and notably developing countries are playing an increasingly important role in world agricultural markets. Population growth in many countries, land and water constraints, consumer preferences for quality products, diverse trading patterns, and increasing emphasis on intermediate agro-food products are all part of the changing dynamic of agriculture trade. Farmers face new challenges while national agriculture policies are juggling various priorities, which may also have a bearing on sustainable development at the global level.

Speakers emphasized the critical role that international trade can play in food security and in the livelihoods of farmers. Discussions highlighted that effective collaboration among countries at the multilateral level is needed to effectively address challenges, to strengthen the agriculture and food system and to build sustainable solutions.

Source:wto.org

 

Tin bài 13/6

107/ DDG Wolff: WTO can contribute to a more resilient, inclusive agricultural trading system

on the Agriculture Policy Landscape on 13 June, Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff said WTO members need to commit to sharing information, broadening perspectives and engaging with each other with open minds in order to build resilience in the global agri-food system. In conclusion, he said: “Together we can identify opportunities to strengthen the agriculture and food system and build sustainable solutions through our common efforts as WTO members.” This is what he said:

I am delighted to welcome you today to this symposium on the agriculture policy landscape. As you would have seen from the programme, we have an impressive line-up of speakers — from academia to international organizations, from think tanks to the public sector. You’ll have the opportunity to hear from experts in agriculture policy and trade from both developed and developing countries on the trends and future expectations of the global food and agriculture economy, and the implications for farmers, consumers, and businesses.

Agriculture has always been a challenging issue at the WTO. And this is not surprising. Farmers around the world face variable environmental conditions, fluctuating world prices, and rapidly evolving value chains. Each country has a unique landscape, shaped by water, soil, and weather conditions. Countries seeking to address food security challenges have to balance the diverse needs of consumers and producers. The perspectives of WTO Members on how to approach the challenges in this sector therefore vary considerably, hence the difficulties in making progress in the negotiations.

The food and agriculture economic landscape has been transformed dramatically in the past fifteen years. The shifting array of market actors, products and tools has created opportunities as well as challenges. The world is interconnected through information technology, communication tools, and trade. Over the past 10 years global agricultural trade has been growing steadily — at an average pace of 5.3 per cent annually.

Farmers can draw on mountains of information that decades ago they would never have been able to access. Satellites are collecting information on weather, crop status, pest prevalence, and water availability. Companies are developing innovative information services to assist with the integration and analysis of this growing mountain of information. New opportunities are emerging for producers to connect to new high-value markets.

There are many global challenges. The agriculture sector needs to feed 9 billion people by 2050 with limited natural resources and in a more sustainable way. While the share of the world’s population that is hungry and poor has been falling, the absolute numbers are unacceptable necessitating concerted efforts of all countries to achieve the relevant Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted by Heads of State and Governments in September 2015 as part of the review of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Droughts, floods, and extreme weather events are occurring more frequently, creating challenges for farmers. Population and environmental changes will affect agriculture demand and supply, influencing the choices made by consumers and producers. No one set of policies will solve these complex issues.

An open, transparent and inclusive trading system is an essential element in addressing these challenges — all the major challenges including achieving food security. I am not suggesting that open trade alone can resolve the food insecurity in the world, but clearly trade is an indispensable tool that must be part of a comprehensive domestic policy package encompassing, for example, coherent and appropriate macroeconomic policies, nutrition policies, research and development, and agricultural extension services to achieve food security.

The risk we face is that it may be difficult for all to gain access to the numerous opportunities that would become available. Many smallholders still struggle to connect to markets — for many reasons including weak infrastructure and lack of access to technologies. We need to ensure that as the agricultural sector is transformed, the less-advantaged have equitable access to the opportunities that are created.

I have three main points that I wish to highlight this morning about how the WTO can contribute to a more resilient, inclusive agricultural trading system.

First, I’d like to emphasize the essential role of information sharing and transparency in leveling the playing field and supporting inclusive trade.

Transparency plays an increasingly important role in ensuring that markets are working for all. However the huge amount and diversity of information that is being generated by new technologies will not automatically enhance transparency. Transparency in such a dynamic environment requires additional effort. Different sources of data need to be integrated before they can be analyzed. Increasingly, sophisticated analytical tools are needed to extract the usable information from vast data sets.

Transparency is an integral aspect of the WTO rules and processes. Members notify to their trading partners the details of their domestic support to agriculture, tariff-rate quota imports, and export competition policies. In the Agriculture Committee, Members ask each other questions on these notifications and on other issues related to the implementation of their WTO commitments. Through these exchanges, WTO Members can gain valuable insights into the policy landscapes of their trading partners.

At the WTO, new data systems are being put in place. Later this year, Members will be able to provide notification data directly to a system for on-line submission of notifications. This system will improve transparency by encouraging harmonized data submission and by ensuring accuracy through automated calculations. The database will compile data from the full Membership, synthesizing information in a way that will enable deeper understanding of policies. Other systems are being developed and expanded in the Secretariat that will link databases, allowing search and analysis across the full range of trade policy information sources maintained at the WTO.

Better availability of data does not ensure the adoption of wise policies that are mindful of domestic needs as well as the interests of trading partners. But without adequate information, harmful errors in policy-making become harder to avoid.
Second, I would like to highlight the importance of building and maintaining broad perspectives. In this rapidly changing world, there is a need to balance divergent views both at home and in this body, to accommodate the interests of all where possible.

As the pace of change accelerates due to greater global interconnectedness, it is necessary to adjust agricultural policies to take advantage of new opportunities and to meet new challenges.

Policy decisions taken at the country level can have wide systemic effects — on broad economic outcomes, on agricultural outcomes, on environmental outcomes and on the quality of life. Ultimately these choices will have an impact on the sustainability and health of the global agri-food system and all who depend on it. By broadening our perspectives, we can better understand the ways these complex systems interact and the way that policy decisions shape farmers’ decisions, firms’ decisions, and consumers’ decisions.

WTO rules were created to minimize the potential negative spillover from trade-distorting policies, but there is room for improvement in the rules to enable the multilateral trading system to respond effectively to transformation in the agriculture sector to ensure that all countries benefit from the system. Equitable access to the emerging opportunities will facilitate the realization of the relevant SDGs.

A well-functioning multilateral trading system is imperative for the realization of SDG 2 — “zero hunger”. The contribution that could be made by the WTO is also recognized in SDG 17, which underscores the need for the promotion of a universal, rules-based, open, non-discriminatory and equitable multilateral trading system under the World Trade Organization”.

The WTO can contribute by providing opportunities to reflect and discuss together. This week’s programme of events at the Secretariat includes this symposium, the Committee on Agriculture, and policy presentations by Member countries. In other meeting rooms today there is another meeting hosted by the Enhanced Integrated Framework which is intended to inspire deeper collaboration and commitments in support of further LDC integration into global and regional trade. These events and meetings provide venues for diverse viewpoints to be expressed and debated.

During the next two days at this Symposium, all of you will have the opportunity to engage with experts on the pressing issues for trade and agriculture. The four sessions cover a wide range of topics — from the economic significance of agriculture trade to the evolving trade patterns; from evolving value-chains to agriculture policy trends. Discussants will provide country- specific perspectives highlighting the relevance of the agriculture sector in their own domestic contexts. Most importantly, there will be time for you to exchange views with each other on these important issues.

The complex challenges we face will not be solved by actions of individual countries. I firmly believe that with a shared commitment to continue to work together we can discover new solutions to these difficult issues.

The WTO must seek to articulate a vision for common goals while ensuring that diverse perspectives are respected and taken into account.

We need to better understand the common problems that we face, so we can use them to learn and to adapt proposals to deliver needed solutions.

In order to build resilience in the global agri-food system WTO Members need to commit to sharing information, broadening perspectives, and engaging with each other with open minds.

In conclusion, I encourage you to take full advantage of this symposium — to be curious, to explore new ideas and to engage in a dialogue with each other. By learning from each other we can strengthen our own interconnectedness. Together we can identify opportunities to strengthen the agriculture and food system and build sustainable solutions through our common efforts as WTO Members.

Source:wto.org

 

108/ EIF symposium looks at how to make trade more inclusive for LDCs

Representatives from 42 least-developed countries (LDCs) met at the first Global Forum on Inclusive Trade for LDCs taking place at the WTO on 13-14 June 2018 to seek ways to further integrate the world’s poorest countries into the multilateral trading system. The event has been organized by the Enhanced Integrated Framework (EIF), a programme dedicated to addressing the trade capacity needs of LDCs, and was opened with a video message by WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo.

Discussions on the first day of the event centred on multilateral and regional trading systems, global agricultural value chains and trade inclusiveness for increased economic growth. In particular, sessions examined ways of fostering more sustainable trade in agriculture, developing trade strategies to help women overcome barriers to doing business and easing and enhancing trade across Africa. Participants called for 2018 to be a turning point for LDCs and trade and underlined the need to address the growing trade gap between developed nations and the world’s poorest countries.

In his opening video message, DG Azevêdo said: “This event is exclusively dedicated to achieving inclusive trade in LDCs — and therefore it could not be more important.  Our aim here is to ensure that more and more people benefit from international trade — especially in LDCs. We must work to strengthen the system so that it is responsive to all of our members. And we must build on the various decisions on LDC issues that WTO members have already taken in recent years.”

Other speakers included the Vice President of The Gambia, Fatoumata Jallow-Tambajang, Her Royal Highness Princess of Burkina Faso, Abze Djigma, and the Commonwealth Secretariat Secretary General, Patricia Scotland.

Vice President Jallow-Tambajang said: “I am pleased to say that as part of this Forum I am announcing a Call to Action — action needed to use trade to fight poverty around the world, action needed to support the global trading system, action needed to foster inclusive trade. Trade action for LDCs is needed now, amid global uncertainties, a growing trade gap and changes in what is traded and how.”

Participants in the Forum included representatives from countries that have recently graduated from LDC status, heads of government, international organizations, the private sector and non-governmental organizations.

About the Enhanced Integrated Framework

The Enhanced Integrated Framework (EIF) is the only multilateral partnership dedicated exclusively to helping LDCs use trade as an engine for growth, sustainable development and poverty reduction. It is a unique global partnership between LDCs, donors and partner agencies, including the WTO, who work together to build trade capacity in LDCs.

Source:wto.org

 

109/ New standard to improve safety in the nuclear sector

Improving safety is a key objective of most industries and boosting the quality of the products and services that contribute to safety is necessary to achieve it. The nuclear sector is set to benefit with a new ISO standard that does just that.

While major accidents in the nuclear sector are rare, the consequences are unimaginable, making the nuclear industry a highly regulated business. This includes the safety and quality requirements of those in the supply chain that supply products and services important to the sector’s safety.

A freshly published standard applies the principles of one of the world’s most renowned quality standards, ISO 9001, to the nuclear sector, combining best practice in quality with the specific requirements of the nuclear industry.

ISO 19443, Quality management systems – Specific requirements for the application of ISO 9001:2015 by organizations in the supply chain of the nuclear energy sector supplying products and services important to nuclear safety (ITNS), will help to increase the safety culture in the sector and harmonize supplier assessments such as auditing.

Bertrand-Marie Nahon, Convenor of the working group¹⁾ that developed the standard, which is part of technical committee ISO/TC 85, Nuclear energy, nuclear technologies, and radiological protection²⁾, said ISO 19443 will not only improve the understanding of quality requirements by suppliers but encourage all major nuclear industry players to work in the same direction.

“It is a win-win standard because it gives buyers the assurance of a standardized level of quality while securing safety and quality for those in the supply chain,” he said.

“In addition, it is aligned with the many regulatory and industrial local and international requirements and allows organizations to better manage risks related to the construction of a nuclear power plant and, ultimately, improve their performance.”

ISO 19443 was developed by 24 international experts, working closely with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which is an official ISO partner.

ISO 19443 is available from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

1) ISO/TC 85/WG 4, Management systems and conformity assessment.

2) The secretariat of ISO/TC 85 is held by AFNOR, ISO’s member for France.

Source:iso.org

 

Tin bài 15/6

110/ Advanced Trade Policy Course for officials from Latin America and the Caribbean

Twenty-two government officials from Latin America and the Caribbean are attending the Advanced Trade Policy Course (ATPC), which is taking place at WTO headquarters in Geneva from 4 June to 27 July 2018. The course was opened by Raymundo Valdes, Head of the Course Design and Training Section of the Institute for Training and Technical Cooperation (ITTC), and Daniel Morales, Head of the Geneva-Based Courses Unit.

El CAPC corresponde al nivel de formación más alto (nivel 3) de la estrategia de aprendizaje progresivo de la OMC y está destinado a participantes que ya poseen un sólido conocimiento de la organización y sus acuerdos. Este curso se centra en el desarrollo y la aplicación de aptitudes prácticas en esferas como el análisis, la formulación y la aplicación de políticas comerciales, las negociaciones comerciales, la solución de diferencias y la vigilancia del comercio.

Los aspectos jurídicos y económicos de las normas y las disciplinas de la OMC se examinan en una serie de sesiones interactivas en las que se realizan estudios de casos prácticos, simulaciones y ejercicios. Por otra parte, se organizan mesas redondas que proporcionan una plataforma para intercambiar conocimientos prácticos, experiencias y mejores prácticas, y debatir temas comerciales de actualidad. Además, los participantes han de preparar y presentar una exposición sobre un tema relacionado con la política comercial.

En la inauguración del curso se animó a los participantes a adoptar una actitud crítica y constructiva en relación con el aprendizaje. También se les alentó a mostrar iniciativa y dinamismo para sacar el máximo provecho del intercambio de ideas, perspectivas y opiniones, tanto entre ellos como con los expertos que participan en el curso.

Los participantes expresaron su agradecimiento a la Secretaría de la OMC por la convocatoria del curso y destacaron el valor de las jornadas desde el punto de vista profesional y personal.

Ada Domínguez, de Paraguay, expresó su confianza en poder “capitalizar este curso en todas las áreas que estamos abordando, como el acceso a mercados, la defensa comercial y la facilitación del comercio”.

Daniela García, de Ecuador, dijo: “mi objetivo es aplicar las herramientas de las cuales disponen los gobiernos en materia comercial, aprender de mis colegas de diferentes países y de los expertos de la OMC, y conocer el estado de las negociaciones multilaterales”.

Marcos Da Rosa, de Uruguay, afirmó que el curso “supone un desafío porque presupone la adquisición previa de conocimientos teóricos avanzados. Mi aspiración con este curso es afianzar estos conocimientos mediante su aplicación práctica en las distintas áreas comprendidas en los acuerdos multilaterales de comercio”.

Lista de participantes:

Argentina	Pablo Andrés Ciallella
Brasil	Pedro Gazzinelli Colares
Chile	Constanza Belén Manosalva Mora
Chile	Natalia Belén Arcos Pino
Colombia	Gladys González Castro
Colombia	Julia Carolina Bonilla Rodríguez
Cuba	Maria del Carmen March Lleo
Cuba	Mariela Cué Ladrón De Guevara
Ecuador	Daniela García Freire
Ecuador	Yovana Alejandra Carrión Ramírez
Guatemala	Thelma Beatriz Borrayo Galindo
Guatemala	Yony Rolando Cifuentes Velásquez
Haití	Chantale Jean
Honduras	Aquiles Yamal Andino Barahona
Honduras	Gabriela Janeth Salinas Osorto
Nicaragua	Gema Karina Guerrero Vega
Paraguay	Ada Noemí Domínguez Alonso
Paraguay	Ángel Daniel Morel Delgado
República Dominicana	Karina Mercedes Alcántara Vásquez
República Dominicana	Wilda María Cabral Carmona
Uruguay	Facundo Simón Fernández Guerra
Uruguay	Marcos Da Rosa Uranga

Source:wto.org

 

111/ Free Trade Between Canada and Israel: A Success Story

International trade has been a hot topic in the wake of a jarring few weeks of American tariffs and Canadian counter-measures. At a time of uncertainty for many sectors, it is worth highlighting a bright spot on the trade front: the recent upgrading of the Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement (CIFTA).

Our growing economic ties with the only liberal democracy in the Middle East are a model for how Canadians can better tap into key markets that otherwise fall under the radar. Many readers would be surprised to learn that Israel was the first country outside North America with which Canada signed a free trade agreement. Since that accord came into force under the Chretien government in 1997, bilateral trade between Canada and Israel has tripled to more than $1.7 Billion and fueled job growth in key Canadian sectors.

Negotiations to modernize CIFTA began under the Harper government and continued under the Trudeau government, demonstrating the non-partisan nature of the Canada-Israel trade file. The new and improved CIFTA will benefit Canadian producers by shrinking and ending tariffs on agricultural and fisheries goods. The upgraded deal also includes new provisions on gender, labour rights, and environmental stewardship, as well as corporate social responsibility and small- and medium-sized enterprises.

Having spent significant time in Israel, and as the head of a Canadian company that has shipped lumber to Israel for many years, I have seen firsthand that this is a market that should not be overlooked. I have been impressed time and again by Israeli business culture. Israelis have a high level of informality, open-mindedness, adaptation, and creativity that far surpasses the business climate in most other countries.

Most importantly, the geopolitical realities of Israel have taught them that failure is not an option, and this lesson permeates their society from the defense to the business communities.

When it comes to risk-taking, Israeli entrepreneurs are famed for their refusal to be governed by fear of failure. When an idea or product proves to be a dud, Israelis take this as a sign to go back to the drawing board rather than to fold up shop. The result? An innovation sector that boasts the highest number of start-ups per capita on the planet.

This is where the opportunity rests for Canadians. As the Government of Canada prioritizes technology “superclusters” that unite businesses and researchers, the possibilities for partnerships with Israelis are virtually limitless.

While the volume in trade may be comparatively small, Israel is a market with a highly educated workforce and a unique edge in key sectors, including medical technology, aeronautics, cyber security, and an array of high-tech fields. Having earned the moniker “Start-Up Nation,” Israel is now home to the world’s highest concentration of tech companies outside of Silicon Valley. Virtually every industry giant — from Google and Facebook to Apple and Intel — has a significant R&D centre in Israel. This should not be unexpected for a country with some of the world’s highest per capita rates of engineers, PhDs, and scientific papers.

Major Canadian firms have taken note. Last June, for example, TMX Group Ltd. (which operates the TSX) appointed an executive solely dedicated to expanding its presence in Israel, with the goal of increasing the number of Israeli companies on the Toronto Stock Exchange. A few months later, TD Canada opened a cyber security office in Tel Aviv. This follows on years of growing tech ties between Canadian and Israeli industry leaders, such as BlackBerry’s 2015 acquisition of Israeli-American start-up WatchDox, a deal said to be worth $100 Million.

Expanded commercial ties parallel growing cooperation between Canadians and Israelis at various levels. Most of Canada’s top universities now have formal partnerships with Israeli universities and research centres. Israeli schools are world leaders in commercializing research through Technology Transfer Organizations (TTO), which provide academics a pathway and financing to turn ideas in the lab into products on the market. Observers note that this is a significant factor in the success of Israel’s tech sector. Canadian researchers and entrepreneurs would be wise to explore how we could integrate this approach into our own innovation sector.

The upgrading of Canada-Israel free trade is an example of how, in an increasingly knowledge-based economy, we must be creative in seeing opportunities beyond our largest trading partners. Following a week of difficult trade developments, and in an environment where, as an example, we can ship Canadian lumber duty free to Israel but not the United States, expanded trade with Israel is a good news story that Canadian leaders, entrepreneurs, and workers can celebrate.

Source: Times of Israel

 

112/ Japan, Canada agree to promote WTO, TPP against U.S. trade policy

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and his Canadian counterpart Justin Trudeau agreed to work to maintain the multilateral trade system based on World Trade Organization rules, a senior Japanese official said Saturday.

Meeting on the sidelines of a Group of Seven summit in Quebec, Canada, the leaders made the affirmation after U.S. President Donald Trump recently imposed stiff global tariffs on steel and aluminum imports in reflection of his “America First” trade policy.

Abe and Trudeau also agreed to cooperate to put the Trans-Pacific Partnership, an 11-nation free trade agreement of which Japan and Canada are members, into force at an early date, according to the Japanese official.

Trump withdrew the United States from the then 12-member TPP in January last year.

In a separate meeting, British Prime Minister Theresa May assured Abe that Britain’s planned exit from the European Union would not create uncertainties among Japanese companies operating in her country, the official said.

Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union will be smooth and not generate confusion because the country and the regional bloc have a shared understanding on the transition period, May was quoted as telling Abe.

The Japanese leader expressed hope that Britain and the European Union will maintain high levels of market access and harmonization of trade and investment standards.

Separately, Abe and German Chancellor Angela Merkel affirmed close coordination toward the early signing and entry into force of a free trade agreement between Japan and the European Union, for which negotiations were finalized late last year.

Abe, separately with Trudeau and May, affirmed their commitment to countering North Korea’s sanctions-evading tactics, particularly through its illicit maritime activities such as ship-to-ship transfers of petroleum and sales of coal and other commodities targeted by U.N. resolutions against the country.

Trudeau, May, Merkel and Italian Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte backed Abe’s efforts for a resolution of North Korea’s abduction of Japanese nationals in the 1970s and 1980s, according to a senior Japanese official.

Conte was quoted by the official as telling Abe that the abduction cases by North Korea were “regrettable incidents” and he fully understands the feelings of the Japanese people.

Japan officially lists 17 citizens as abduction victims and suspects North Korea’s involvement in many more disappearances. While five of the 17 were repatriated in 2002, Pyongyang maintains that eight have died and the other four never entered the country.

Abe and Conte, who took office June 1, agreed to visit the other’s country as soon as possible as part of efforts to deepen bilateral relations.

Trade issues and Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons program are high on the agenda at the G-7 summit, which brings together the leaders of Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United States, plus the European Union.

Source: Japan Today

113/ EU outrage over Trump’s tariffs is a shameless double standard

European governments and the EU Commission have spent most of the past month condemning President Donald Trump for his steel and aluminium tariffs, targeted against – among others – European exporters.

The president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker stated: “I am concerned by this decision. The EU believes these unilateral US tariffs are unjustified and at odds with World Trade Organisation rules. This is protectionism, pure and simple.”

His comments were echoed by EU trade commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom, who declared that: “The EU’s response will be proportionate and in accordance with WTO rules. We will now trigger a dispute settlement case at the WTO.”

French President Emmanuel Macron called the US tariffs “illegal and a mistake”, while the UK’s international trade secretary, Liam Fox, confirmed that they were “patently absurd”.

The EU will now challenge the US action in front of the WTO and take retaliatory measures. The bloc is determined to present itself as the defender of the global trading system.

Perhaps this position would have more credibility if the EU were not a consistent and egregious violator of trade rules when it suits its members’ protectionist interests.

In the next few weeks, the EU will vote on a proposed ban of palm oil, a biofuel which none of its member states are able to produce, as they all lack a tropical climate. EU countries do grow a lot of competitor crops, however, including rapeseed, sunflower, and sugar beet. By some strange coincidence, palm oil alone is being singled out for a ban on supposed “environmental grounds”.

This would be a credible argument if it weren’t for the fact that palm oil entering the EU passes every environmental hoop which European bodies can dream up for it.

The EU’s hypocrisy on trade has not gone unnoticed by the south-east Asian countries where most of the palm oil is produced. Just as the EU prepared its retaliation to Trump’s aggression over steel tariffs, so Asian governments are preparing their own retaliation to the EU’s aggression over palm oil.

Reports suggest that this retaliation could include the loss of up to £7bn of defence and aerospace contracts for British exporters. Other European countries will not be spared – Germany alone exports more than €12bn annually to south-east Asian countries.

It may be true that, in relation to steel and aluminium, the EU has been wronged. It is also true to say that Trump’s mercantilist attitude towards trade is harmful and illogical: no free-trader would quarrel with the EU leaders’ criticisms of the US President.

However, for the EU to then present itself as the paragon of virtue, and the standard-bearer for the international trading system, is a giant and unjustified leap. The EU cannot credibly claim to be defending global free trade while at the same time flagrantly bullying smaller countries in Africa and Asia into accepting its protectionist tariffs and regulations.

That Juncker does not resort to late-night tweets to announce his protectionist policies may make him more dignified – but it does not give him the moral or political high-ground over Trump.

With a brand new trade policy on the horizon, there is much for the UK to learn. Domestic special interests and anti-trade lobbyists will attempt to derail trade progress. The illogical debate about chlorine chicken already hovers over UK-US trade discussions, just as palm oil hovers over the potential discussions with south-east Asia.

If we truly want “Global Britain” to be a leader in promoting global trade, we must resist the impulse to give in to every environmental, social, or special-interest lobbying campaign. In other words, we must avoid the mistakes that, even today, bedevil the EU’s trade policymaking.

Source: City A.M

 

Tin bài 19/6

114/ Norway initiates WTO dispute complaint against US steel, aluminium duties

Norway has requested WTO dispute consultations with the United States regarding US duties on certain imported steel and aluminium products. The request was circulated to WTO members on 19 June.

Norway claims the US duties of 25% and 10% on imports of steel and aluminium products respectively are inconsistent with provisions of the WTO’s General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 and the Agreement on Safeguards.

Further information is available in document WT/DS552/1.

What is a request for consultations?

The request for consultations formally initiates a dispute in the WTO. Consultations give the parties an opportunity to discuss the matter and to find a satisfactory solution without proceeding further with litigation. After 60 days, if consultations have failed to resolve the dispute, the complainant may request adjudication by a panel.

• More on consultations
• Current status of disputes

Source:wto.org

 

115/ WTO members intensify discussions on standards

three-year review of the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Agreement, proposing ideas on how to improve implementation of the Agreement at a TBT committee meeting on 19-21 June. Eleven new proposals were submitted by members, with the committee scheduled to conclude the review by November 2018. Members also discussed 61 specific trade concerns, 8 of which are new.

8th Triennial Review

The review process for the Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement started in November 2017 and is scheduled to be concluded at the TBT committee’s 14-15 November 2018 meeting. Every three years, WTO members evaluate how they are applying the TBT Agreement. The review is driven by members’ proposals for new work relating to specific topics addressed by the TBT Committee.  The proposals submitted addressed the following themes:

Transparency

• The proposal submitted by the United States (G/TBT/W/535) is for members to provide up-to-date website information identifying the location of adopted final texts for technical regulations, as well as applicable conformity assessment procedures, and to task the WTO secretariat to maintain this information as a publicly-available list.
• The proposal submitted by Switzerland (G/TBT/W/536) is to improve the transparency on the handling of comments on notified draft measures by recommending the publishing of comments and replies online, on a voluntary basis.
• The proposal submitted by Australia (G/TBT/W/537) is to improve the notification process by using keywords in notifications, adding new fields in the notification document to indicate final measures and date of entry-into-force, and improving the effective use of ePing, the notifications alert system.
• The proposal submitted by the European Union (G/TBT/W/534) is for the TBT committee to discuss how to facilitate compliance with mandatory marking and labelling requirements on imported products and to develop recommendations or guidance to support members in this respect.
• The proposal submitted by Chinese Taipei (G/TBT/W/530) is for members to take a holistic approach to risk assessment in committee discussions, including the use of risk assessment in respect of conformity assessment procedures, standards, and technical regulations.
• The proposal submitted by the United States (G/TBT/W/531) recommends various elements for thematic discussion among members as part of developing practical guidelines to support regulators’ use of trade facilitative conformity assessment procedures, including national quality infrastructure (NQI), and use of international and regional systems.
• The proposal submitted by Brazil (G/TBT/W/533) encourages members to resume debate on the Indicative List of Approaches and suggested that thematic sessions be held to discuss practical examples of acceptance of conformity assessment results
• The proposal submitted by Canada (G/TBT/W/529) is for holding a workshop on the issue of incorporating standards by reference in regulation, and to discuss best practices and potential ideas for international guidelines on policy considerations when referencing standards.
• The proposal submitted by Canada (G/TBT/W/532) is for holding a session on the role of gender in the development of standards and technical regulations, to encourage an exchange of experiences by governments and standards development organizations, and to discuss ongoing work in this area.
• The joint proposal submitted by the Philippines, Mauritius and Uganda (G/TBT/W/538/Rev.1) is to check the feasibility of expanding the current Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) dealing with the WTO Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS agreement) to include TBT matters, or to set up a dedicated TBT development facility.
• The proposal submitted by Brazil (G/TBT/W/533, Section 2) is for members to consider the creation of a voluntary procedure for ad hoc consultations to promote resolution of trade concerns
• The proposal submitted by United States (G/TBT/W/539) is to discuss appropriate participation of, and best practices for, observers to the TBT committee

Labelling

Risk assessment, Quality Infrastructure and certification

How to use standards in regulation

Gender

How to improve technical assistance

Making the technical barriers to trade committee more efficient

Specific trade concerns

WTO members discussed a total of 61 specific trade concerns, 8 of which are new. Below is a summary of the new concerns. A full list of the trade concerns is available here. For more information on previous trade concerns see the 20-22 March 2018 and 8-9 November 2017 meetings.

1. Brazil — labelling of beverages, wine, and grape derivatives

The EU questioned a recent directive in Brazil on the labelling of beverages, wine, and grape derivatives. The EU maintained that the new requirements, including how the product denomination and list of ingredient must be indicated on the label, could hinder international trade, and urged Brazil to follow the international standards of the International Organization of Vine and Wine (OIV). Brazil said that the process of developing this directive was carried out in a transparent manner and in line with the WTO TBT Agreement.  Public consultations on the draft resolution were notified to the WTO, and Brazil said answers to the concerns raised will be provided as soon as possible.

2. India — Testing and Certification of telegraph

The US expressed its concerns that the amendments introduced by the Indian government requiring local conformity assessment will lead to a duplication and overlap of testing and certification for a wide range of telecommunications and other equipment. The US said that other WTO members accept these products on the basis of a supplier’s declaration of conformity or tests from relevant laboratories and schemes. India responded by saying that the aim of this additional requirement is to ensure the safety of the users and security of the network. It does not discriminate between foreign and local business, and recognizes testing results issued by partner countries.

3. US — Certification on security screening equipment

China voiced concerns about the unpredictability of the new certification requirements of the US Transportation Security Administration (TSA) for security screening equipment. China said the TSA had not provided its companies with information about the completeness or deficiencies of their applications to make necessary corrections if needed. The US replied that this TSA certification relates to procurement and is thus not a matter for discussion in the TBT committee.

4. United States — Energy Conservation Standards for Compressors

China expressed its concern that the US rules on energy conservation for compressors were inconsistent with relevant international standards. In particular, China questioned the classification methods for air compressors and equipment and asked for clarifications about its scientific basis. China noted that it submitted comments on the measure in 2016, but that no reply had been received. The US said that answers to all the comments received are published together with the final rule. The new concerns raised would be conveyed to the US Department of Energy.

5. Indonesia —Safety and Quality Standard of Alcoholic Beverages

Indonesia has introduced a draft regulation by which alcoholic beverages imported into its market have to meet specified safety and quality standards, in addition to new labelling and advertising requirements. Mexico expressed concern with the new standards, in particular with respect to advertising restrictions and the maximum established level of methanol in alcohol beverages, which is below the amount used in the production of tequila. Mexico asked Indonesia to clarify whether this specific requirement applied to tequila. Indonesia explained that this standard is used to support public morals and that the advertising restrictions apply to alcoholic beverages regardless of their origin.

6. Colombia — batteries imported into or manufactured in Colombia

Colombia has introduced a technical regulation applicable to zinc-carbon and alkaline cells and batteries imported into or manufactured in Colombia. The new regulation requires the removal of these kinds of batteries from any products that enter to the Colombian markets, to protect the environment and human health.  Mexico, supported by the US, expressed concerns about the negative impact this regulation will have on the toy industry, which usually provide batteries inside toys. Mexico explained that this regulation would require their industries to have a separate line of production which would be more costly. Colombia said that this measure was already adopted and will go into effect as of January 2019, but it would nevertheless welcome comments from other Members.

7. Ecuador —Surface tension agents

Mexico raised concerns on Ecuador’s draft technical regulation which only recognizes one testing method to prove that the requirements for biodegradability and phosphate content in surface tension agents has been met, and which therefore is not in line with international standards. The draft also requires that conformity assessment would need to be carried out through the accredited certification bodies in Ecuador.  Ecuador explained that comments submitted by members on the draft regulation during the comment period had been taken into account, including the inclusion of various testing methods. Ecuador expressed its willingness to continue working bilaterally with Mexico to address concerns.

8. Indonesian  — National Standard and certification requirements for the import of biscuits

Switzerland was concerned that these requirements will drive Swiss companies out of the Indonesian market, and asked Indonesia for update on the development of the measures and to confirm whether these measures will be implemented or withdrawn.  Indonesia said that the implementation of this measure was postponed, as notified to the WTO.

Side events:

The following side events were organised at the margins of the TBT committee meeting:

• Information Session on SPS/TBT notification alert system ePing, 19 June:
  Members heard an update from WTO Secretariat on the ePing notification alert system. The session featured presentations by Sam Munsie, Assistant Director Office of Trade Negotiations, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade from Australia and George Opiyo, TBT National Enquiry Point, Uganda National Bureau of Standards, who shared their countries’ experiences in using ePing to engage domestic stakeholders regarding regulatory requirements affecting exports .
• Good Governance in Developing Modern Quality Infrastructure Systems, 20 June 2018:
  The event addressed good governance foundations for  modern quality infrastructure necessary for integration into the global trading system. The event was organized by UNIDO in cooperation with the Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO). Panellists included representatives from quality infrastructure governance organizations for accreditation (ILAC) and standardization (ISO), as well as representatives from the Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO), , CARICOM Regional Organization for Standards and Quality (CROSQ), Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), UNIDO and the WTO Secretariat.
• Addressing Tensions and Avoiding Disputes: Specific Trade Concerns in the TBT Committee, 21 June 2018:
  Dr Kateryna Holzer (PhD in Law & PhD in Economics, WTO Visiting Academic, formerly with the World Trade Institute of the University of Bern) presented her research on how raising specific trade concerns serves as a trade tension resolution and dispute prevention mechanism. The side event was organized by the WTO Secretariat, and included the participation of Kate Swan, Chairperson of the TBT Committee, Lauro Locks and Hoe Lim (WTO).

Source:wto.org

 

116/ WTO members review four regional trade agreements

WTO members reviewed the Canada-European Union, Canada-Ukraine, Costa Rica-Colombia, and EU-San Marino trade agreements at a meeting of the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements (CRTA) on 19-20 June. The Committee also adopted a new template for members to notify changes to existing RTAs.

Parties to the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement Between Canada and the EU (CETA) said their agreement, which was signed on 30 October 2016 and has been provisionally applied since 21 September 2017, raises the benchmark for agreements covering trade in goods and services, investment, intellectual property and sustainable development. The EU said CETA was their most ambitious and progressive economic pact and sent a powerful signal to the world of the bloc’s willingness to open markets and modernize trade rules. Canada said the agreement was a gold standard for them.

Both parties were represented by their respective negotiators and members welcomed the interactive exchange at the meeting. A number of members raised questions at the meeting on the allocation of Canada’s tariff rate quotas as well as provisions in CETA covering rules of origin, geographical indications, and investment.

The factual presentation on this RTA as well as the document compiling members’ questions and answers are available here.

For the Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement, which entered into force on 1 August 2017, parties to the Agreement noted their commitment to deepen relations and broaden business opportunities. The agreement covers trade in goods only, with a “rendezvous clause” allowing coverage to be expanded in 2019, including on trade in services, investment, or movement of professionals. Canada said the agreement represented a significant milestone in its bilateral ties with Ukraine. Ukraine said the agreement will allow for the harmonious development and expansion of trade and establishes a predictable framework for business activity.

A number of members commented on the broad coverage of the agreement, even though it only covered trade in goods, as it also includes chapters on e-commerce, environment, labour and transparency, among others. Several members raised questions at the meeting on agricultural tariffs, government procurement, and intellectual property provisions in the agreement.

The factual presentation on this RTA as well as the document compiling members’ questions and answers are available here.

As for the Costa Rica-Colombia Free Trade Agreement, which covers trade in goods and services, parties to the Agreement cited opportunities for traders and consumers in each market. The trade agreement, which entered into force on 1 August 2016, will liberalize about 95% of the parties’ tariffs lines by 2030. It also includes commitments on services, investment, government procurement, intellectual property and electronic commerce. With this agreement, Costa Rica now has a trade agreement in force with each of the Pacific Alliance countries, which is one of the conditions to accede to the Latin American trade bloc. Colombia said the agreement was a fundamental and natural step to consolidate trade relations in Latin America.  Costa Rica said the agreement was a modern trade tool that establishes a legal framework with clear and transparent rules.

A number of members raised questions about the parties’ non-notified RTAs and rules of origin in relation to other regional trade agreements.

The factual presentation on this RTA as well as the document compiling members’ questions and answers are available here.

Members also considered the EU-San Marino Cooperation and Customs Union Agreement, which expands on San Marino’s strong traditional ties with Italy, an EU member. The Agreement entered into force on 1 April 2002.

The factual presentation on this RTA as well as the document compiling members’ questions and answers are available here.

Other Committee Work

The Committee adopted a new template for members to notify changes to their existing RTAs. The notification format will be sent to the Committee on Trade and Development (CTD) and the Councils for Trade in Goods and Services for adoption.

The chair of the Committee, Ambassador Julian Braithwaite (United Kingdom), told members that 75 RTAs currently  in force have not been notified to the WTO as of 7 June. Meanwhile, factual presentations are pending for 34 RTAs involving WTO members only, and a further 36 RTAs are pending involving non-members, counting goods and services agreements separately. The EU asked about responses to the questions it had asked to the Latin American Integration Association (LAIA) members in October 2017. LAIA members indicated that the CRTA was not the correct forum for the discussion of RTAs involving their members while the EU indicated it was not willing to discuss LAIA agreements exclusively in the CTD.

The chair said consultations were continuing with  those delegations where  factual consideration of their RTA had been delayed due to lack of comments or data from the parties involved. The WTO secretariat called on members to submit data and comments in a timely fashion to enable the committee to adhere to its work programme.

At the start of the meeting, the US, Canada and EU took the floor to request clarification on why the consideration of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Customs Union was not on the agenda. The chair said discussions had been taking place in the CTD yet he intended to speak with the CTD chair to see how to take the consideration of the agreement forward.

The chair further noted that, as no delegation had responded to his offer to hold consultations on implementing paragraph 28 of the Nairobi Ministerial Declaration from 2015, he would be dropping the item from the agenda. He noted however that discussions on the systemic relationship between RTAs and the multilateral trading system and improvements in the functioning of the CRTA were taking place under other agenda items, and he hoped the discussions would continue.

Next meeting

The next meeting of the CRTA is scheduled for 18 and 19 September.

Source:wto.org

 

117/ WTO “Cotton Day” focuses on assistance for cotton sector, progress in negotiations

At WTO “Cotton Day” on 19 June, the Cotton 4 producers —Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad and Mali — and other WTO members discussed with donors the lessons learned from recent cotton assistance projects. The need for both private and public funding and risk-mitigating guarantees for these projects emerged as some of the ways to make development assistance more effective. WTO members also discussed the latest state of play in cotton negotiations since the 11th Ministerial Conference at the end of last year.

Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff chaired the discussions on cotton assistance under the Director-General’s Consultative Framework Mechanism on Cotton, with the aim of stimulating dialogue between cotton assistance beneficiaries and current or potential donors. The blending of private and public funds for cotton projects and the inclusion of risk-mitigating guarantees in partnership agreements emerged as priorities from the discussions. The European Union offered to organize a technical session to discuss some of these issues in detail.

The discussions were followed by a meeting chaired by Ambassador Deep Ford to review WTO members’ trade-related cotton policies. In this meeting, the Cotton 4 stressed the need for all members to engage actively in cotton negotiations to achieve a measurable outcome on cotton by the 12th Ministerial Conference (MC12).

New functions of the Cotton Portal, launched at the end of last year, were also showcased during the meeting.

The next cotton day is tentatively scheduled for the last week of November 2018.

Cotton development assistance projects

Cotton-producing countries welcomed the WTO Secretariat’s update on the Director-General’s Evolving Table on Cotton Development Assistance, which reflects trends in cotton assistance projects in the past few years.

In a cover note accompanying the table, Director-General Roberto Azevêdo highlighted the consistent level of cotton-specific development assistance provided by donors, both in total number of projects (currently 26 active projects) and the value of the projects (commitments of USD 204.2 million) as of June 2018. Disbursements decreased slightly compared with the previous reporting period, to USD 96.7 million, due to the recent completion of three projects. The “evolving table” is updated twice a year by the Agriculture and Commodities Division of the WTO.

The Cotton 4′s “Cotton Roadmap Project” and the “Pan African Cotton Investment Programme” of the African, Caribbean and Pacific countries (ACP) Group were discussed. The “Cotton Roadmap Project” seeks to develop the cotton sector by improving local processing capacity and expanding cotton-to-textile value chains at the regional level. The ACP’s “Pan-African” project aims at using private sector funding to boost the cotton sector and reduce poverty in the region. Donor agencies acknowledged the value of the two proposals and vowed to enhance cooperation in providing project implementation support.

Participants noted that cooperation between developing countries has yielded some very positive outcomes. Pakistan outlined its new partnership with the C4 while other members shared their own experiences and committed to provide more financial and technical support for the Cotton 4.

Donor agencies shared their experiences from cotton assistance projects as well as information on new funding mechanisms and future priorities. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ- Germany) announced that a new global project totalling EUR 18 million was being developed. The Directorate-General for International Cooperation and Development (DG-DEVCO) of the European Commission shared lessons learned from past projects, and highlighted the new elements of its development strategy for cotton. The Cotton 4 and other members sought further information and called for a presentation to be scheduled regarding DEVCO’s new programme. The Chair also suggested that DEVCO reach out to international finance institutions to take part in future WTO cotton days.

The African Export-Import Bank (Afreximbank) introduced the “African Commodities Initiative” (Africoin), a roadmap for adding value in Africa’s cotton market, and highlighted some key interventions of the Bank in the cotton sector. It outlined significant business opportunities for cotton farmers and emphasized that low risk and commercial profitability are key criteria in selecting projects.

The presentations made during the meeting are available here.

WTO members’ cotton policies and negotiations

In his briefing on the state of play in cotton negotiations since MC11, Ambassador Deep Ford highlighted the Cotton 4′s call “to resume work in Geneva and redouble efforts, with a view to reaching concrete and measurable outcomes as soon as possible on trade distorting cotton support”.

WTO members welcomed the Secretariat’s background paper TN/AG/GEN/34/Rev.8, an update on all cotton-related trade policies drawn from members’ notifications and other submissions to the WTO, including replies to the Secretariat questionnaire circulated on 24 January and relevant information from members’ trade policy reviews.

The Cotton 4 reiterated the importance of cotton to economic growth and development in least developed countries (LDCs) and urged all members to engage actively in negotiations in order to achieve a substantive outcome on cotton subsidies by MC12. The Cotton 4 highlighted the need for updated information and in-depth analysis of the impact of domestic support to cotton. They also suggested considering a possible expansion of the list of cotton-derived products for which LDC exports are subject to duty-free quota-free access. Several members reaffirmed their readiness to engage in the negotiations on cotton, possibly through incremental steps. One member said it could possibly be a stand-alone issue.

“Cotton is a topic of key importance in the WTO,” said Ambassador Deep Ford, which “has often been referred to as a litmus test for the WTO”. He urged members to demonstrate “flexibility and creativity in the search for new paths” and to “engage differently and use time differently to achieve outcomes sooner rather than later”. He concluded that this meeting had been a good preparation for the next meeting of the Committee on Agriculture in special session on 16 July.

Trends in cotton trade

Kai Hughes, the Executive Director of the International Cotton Advisory Committee (ICAC), analysed the major trends in cotton trade, focusing in particular on the situation of African cotton in world trade.

African cotton yields have continued to remain flat since the 1990s whilst world average yields have risen by 40 per cent, he said.  African average yields are now 64 per cent lower than world average yields.  He pointed out that in Tanzania, Zimbabwe and Uganda women play a major role in cotton farming.

The costs associated with producing cotton in Africa are extremely competitive with the rest of the world except in a few countries where the high costs of transportation and inputs have helped raise costs, Mr Hughes highlighted. He underlined the importance of the ginning process in raising quality levels, which could play a crucial role in improving cotton producers’ competitiveness. He also highlighted the development by the ICAC of a ‘Soil Health App’, which will help farmers improve their productivity. It is hoped that the technology can be extended to monitor pests and disease.

Mr Hughes noted the world’s cotton consumption is expected to continue growing in 2018-19 while cotton production is expected to fall. Cotton prices have remained relatively high. The level of subsidies to the cotton sector as measured by ICAC increased in 2017-18. Another issue he highlighted is how the cotton sector can co-exist with man-made fibres in the long term and the need to explore new markets to secure a strong future for the cotton sector.

The ICAC presentations are available here.

New features of the Cotton Portal

A new video on the launch of the Cotton Portal launch was presented to participants. The Cotton Portal, developed jointly by the WTO and the International Trade Centre (ITC), was launched in Buenos Aires on 11 December 2017. New features of the Portal will allow users to find even more practical information for better trade. These new features include an “export potential” map and the contact details for buyers in export markets. Historical data on cotton supply, use by country and key statistics provided by ICAC, including harvested areas, production, consumption, trade and stocks, have also been added to the portal.

The export potential map is available here.

ICAC’s data are available here.

Contact WTO Cotton Team: cottonclub@wto.org

Source:wto.org

 

118/ WTO hosts final round and closing ceremony of Moot Court Competition

Law students from around the world met in Geneva on 19-23 June for the final round of the ELSA Moot Court Competition on WTO Law, a simulated hearing of the WTO dispute settlement system, organized by the European Law Students’ Association (ELSA) with the support of the WTO. The Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies in Switzerland was the winner of this year’s event, with the National Law School of India University the runner-up.

The ELSA Moot Court Competition on WTO Law is a simulated hearing under the rules of the WTO dispute settlement system involving exchanges of written submissions and adversarial hearings before panellists on international trade law issues. The teams prepare and analyse a fictitious case and present their arguments both as a complainant and a respondent in front of a panel that consists of trade law experts.

This year the fictitious case covered issues concerning the relationship between trade and environment, including measures taken to address carbon emissions in the production of goods, tariff obligations and prohibited subsidies. The case was written by James J. Nedumpara, Professor & Head, Centre for Trade and Investment Law, Indian Institute of Foreign Trade.

A total of 99 teams of students from around the world participated in regional rounds held between February and April 2018 in Nairobi (Kenya), Wroclaw (Poland), Naples (Italy), Bangkok (Thailand) and Washington DC (United States). The top 25 teams qualified for the final round, which was hosted at the Graduate Institute and at WTO headquarters in Geneva. This final round provided a chance for the best students to meet their fellow students, to witness the trade law world in action and to see the opportunities available for a career in trade law.

After four days of competition, the semi-finals and the Grand Final took place on 23 June. The semi-finalists were the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Maastricht University, the National Law School of India University and the National University of Singapore. The Grand Final Bench was composed of distinguished panellists chaired by Ujal Singh Bhatia, the Chairman of the Appellate Body.

The team from the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies won the competition while the National Law School of India was runner-up and the best team from a developing country. Deputy Director-General Karl Brauner opened the awards ceremony while Gabrielle Marceau, counsellor at the Legal Affairs Division of the WTO, served as Master of Ceremonies. Ambassador Sunanta Kangvalkulkij, chair of the WTO Dispute Settlement Body, presided over the prize-giving. One of the prizes the winning teams received were scholarships to attend courses at the World Trade Institute in Bern.

The Grand Final was followed by a renaming ceremony for the competition. As of next year, the WTO moot court will be called the John H. Jackson Moot Court Competition, in memory of the academic founding father of both the field of international trade law and the WTO as a formally constituted international organization. Mr Jackson’s family and representatives from Georgetown University, where he taught international trade law, participated in the ceremony.

The ELSA Moot Court Competition on WTO Law is an example of the WTO’s broad support for capacity building. The WTO sends legal experts to the regional rounds to act as panellists. WTO staff members also advise ELSA on the academic aspects of running the competition and are integral to planning the final oral round in Geneva.

The WTO has been a technical sponsor and partner in the competition since its inception in 2002-2003. WTO staff members assist with various organisational and academic aspects of the event. Likewise, international WTO experts from private international law firms, think tanks, permanent missions, and various organizations made contributions towards sponsoring or supporting this global competition.

Furthermore, the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa and the Society of International Economic Law (SIEL), along with private and local sponsors, contributed towards the smooth running of the African Round. Academic institutions, such as the Society for International Economic Law (SIEL), the European Society of International Law, and the World Trade Institute provided support by offering prizes to the winning teams in the regional and final rounds. Georgetown University also supports the competition academically. The entire trade law community embraces the value of this competition.

Source:wto.org

 

119/ The key ingredient in food safety

As Quality Manager at KMC, the Danish-based food ingredients company, Marianne Dam is responsible for the maintenance and updating of KMC quality systems and certifications. Here, she explains how ISO 22000 is used and the many benefits it brings to food management systems.

With its production sites and headquarters in Denmark, KMC has grown from being a provider of potato starch and potato flakes to a company that also supplies special ingredients to customers around the world. Thanks to innovative food solutions – such as substituting common proteins used in dairy and confectionery with potato starch solutions – the company enables food manufacturers to make cheaper, healthier and less controversial products. As a result, KMC has enjoyed successful growth and, as the company’s Quality Manager, Marianne Dam says ISO 22000 plays an important role – indeed an essential one – in its future expansion.

ISOfocus: What does your company see as the main benefit of having food management systems in place such as ISO 22000?

Marianne Dam: KMC is an ingredients company and we deliver products to the global food market. We are dependent on having a reliable food management system in place – first of all, because of our responsibility to our customers (typically B2B) when food safety issues arise and, ultimately, because we owe it to our global end users. Our management system helps us to be safe, focused and efficient in our production set-up.

There are clear benefits to having a food management system certified by a third party. These certificates are the first valid evidence of the systems implemented in our company and many of our customers use them as an important part of their supplier approval process. We believe we could not manage our existing business without such recognition.

In general, our management system has given us the opportunity to gather internal expertise within the company with which to formalize procedures, i.e. for optimizing the training and education of all employees; implementing control of record management to ensure the right and most up-to-date information gets to the right people; and improving management’s role and communication with the rest of the organization.

These items have been the basis for our business’s development from supplier of commodities to purveyor of ingredients for food, pet food and livestock feed customers all over the world. It is interesting to note that today’s pet food and livestock feed industry now has the same high demands for raw materials as the food industry.

What do you think are the biggest challenges ahead in food safety and the corresponding management and certification systems?

The biggest challenge in the future of food safety is the insufficient understanding of the real product combined with the lack of confidence between buyer and supplier in today’s complex global market. Communication and the exchange of documentation and goods have become increasingly easy, so much so that many of our customers are demanding manuals that are valid for all raw materials, explaining what to do in case of an “incident”.

Unfortunately, as many companies have a huge variety of raw materials, it isn’t possible to collate detailed knowledge of each component. Although basic documentation and certification make sense, cooperation and partnership must be the way forward to maintain the focus on food safety, decent products and individual responsibility.

How can ISO 22000 and the Food Safety System Certification (FSSC) help to address these challenges?

The main advantage of ISO 22000 is that it is a general standard, so its principles can be used for all kinds of food/feed industries dependent on risk assessment thinking. It gives a company responsibility for handling its own production and products based on its own knowledge and experience. Of course, the whole system relies on appropriate documentation and analysis, and third-party auditing ensures that the company lives up to an acceptable level of quality for a modern food industry.

How do standards and the increasing demand for certification, documentation, audits, etc. affect a smaller player in the global food sector?

The demand for certification is becoming increasingly complex and time-consuming. Today, customers expect the basics of product quality and food safety, along with sustainability and ethical trade. There are many standards with different kinds of “owners” and many customers have preferences, which makes it difficult to choose the best and/or the most comprehensive. While larger suppliers can decide for themselves which certifications they want to comply with, there are greater risks involved for small companies.

Pricing is a relevant issue here since somebody needs to cover the cost for the extra administration and documentation. This is an important area of focus for a smaller company. Ensuring business survival can mean daring to say to your customer “can we do this another way?”, or simply “no, thanks”.

What modifications/improvements would you like to see in ISO 22000 to make it more relevant for your busines?

ISO 22000 cannot stand alone due to the general demands from global food customers to have its certifications recognized by the Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI), which maintains a scheme to benchmark food safety standards for manufacturers. Today, this can be solved by the opportunity to have an extra “layer” of good manufacturing practices related to food, resulting in the FSSC 22000 Food Safety System Certification, a framework for effectively managing your organization’s food safety responsibilities that is fully recognized by the GFSI. In the near future, the same opportunity will be there regarding livestock feed.

To maintain ISO 22000’s importance for the food industry, it would be fantastic to have similar appendices for sustainability and an ethical approach, resulting in a basic standard and a wide range of possibilities to design an integrated system for the company.

ISO has a huge advantage in being internationally known and, hopefully, the organization will take on the challenge and make it easier for more companies all over the world.

Source:iso.org

 

120/ Cultivating growth in Nigeria

Agricultural products are the base of the Nigerian economy, supplying food for the Nigerian people as well as valuable cash crops for export to other countries. These days, the agricultural sector is developing fast, and standards are being used to unleash the potential of the agri-food industry.

The global food security challenge is straightforward: by 2050, the world must feed 9.7 billion people. That means the demand for food will be 60 % greater than it is today. The United Nations has set ending hunger, achieving food security and promoting sustainable agriculture as the second of its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for the year 2030.

Nigeria has been an avid proponent and early adopter of the SDGs, which were approved by the United Nations in September 2015, and plans and policies are now underway to achieve these goals. Despite a strong reliance on farming and agriculture, linked to 70 % of Nigeria’s employment, malnutrition is prevalent in many regions, according to the Sustainable Development Goals Fund (SDGF), a United Nations mechanism providing financial support for sustainability initiatives. Today, Nigeria is placing renewed focus on its agriculture as it seeks to address chronic food insecurity in parts of the country.

Food security and why it matters

Why the urgency? The obvious reason is that everybody needs food. Without proper nutrition, our body couldn’t survive. Yet several reports have indicated that one out of ten people among the 7.6 billion world population goes hungry, and with the world’s demographics increasing, this statistic may be even higher.

Food security looks at the availability of food and the accessibility of the available food. Prior to the discovery of oil, which channelled funds away from the farming sector, the issue of food insecurity was non-existent; Nigeria was able to feed its population and export the surplus. Today, despite its vast agricultural potential, the country is a net importer of food.

Once the primary source of government revenue and foreign exchange earnings, agriculture in Nigeria has suffered from decades of underinvestment, policy neglect and lost opportunity due to poor planting material, low fertiliser application and a weak agricultural extension system.

A holistic approach

But food insecurity in Nigeria is not solely tied to underproduction (the country produces 8.41 %, 1.09 % and 2.85 % of roots and tubers, cereal and legumes respectively) though there is an urgent need to step up production. According to a report by the Central Bank of Nigeria (2001), the current rate of increased food production of 2.5 % per annum does not measure up with the 2.8 % annual population growth.

The rising competition for food has imposed demands for lasting solutions, but what steps are required to truly change the agricultural sector into an engine for transformative growth? To be sure, cranking up production is no silver bullet for the country’s food insecurity; instead, an all-encompassing approach is what is needed.

Self-sufficiency can only be achieved if crop yields are matched by post-harvest technology, which largely determines the final quality of the product. This includes protecting crops from spoilage and wastage through maximum investment in storage techniques, stimulating production and preventing the hoarding of foodstuffs by agri-food suppliers or local buying agents. In parallel, there needs to be a holistic approach to agricultural research, encompassing various stakeholders in both the public and private sectors in the agricultural value chain.

Safe enough to eat

With a fast-growing economy, a burgeoning middle class and complex supply chains, Nigeria also faces a growing array of food safety challenges. Despite the industry’s best efforts, foodborne diseases and food recalls have been regular occurrences in restaurants and food chains across the country. More than half of all foodborne outbreaks in the country are associated with poor food handling by restaurants, banquet facilities, schools and other institutions, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention office in Nigeria.

Food safety involves efforts and compliance with procedures that are put in place to ensure that food is safe, from farm to table. These efforts include ethical safety steps in handling, preparation and storage. Of major importance are the environment and personal hygiene, pest control, removal of waste, and cleaning programmes to minimize the risk of foodborne diseases along the food value chain.

In Nigeria, and all over the world, governments continue to pass laws and regulations to prevent unethical practices that could support the spread of foodborne illnesses from unsafe food production. That’s why standards for identifying, preventing, controlling and monitoring foodborne pathogens and microbial parasites are clearly needed to help achieve acceptable quality assurance in the food industry and its value chain.

Addressing the challenges

ISO standards are inevitably the main tool for addressing today’s food challenges. They enable safe practices along the global food supply chain, from sound agricultural methods to layout specifications for the end products. This global trend has prompted the Standards Organization of Nigeria (SON), ISO member for the country, in collaboration with its stakeholders, to set limits and requirements that are geared towards sustaining food quality and global best practice.

Of the 50 000 standards developed by SON, some 5 000 are related to food. At SON, we review existing food standards, develop new ones and evaluate areas of contention surrounding new market needs. But regulation is only as good as the resources available to investigate and enforce it, so Nigerian Industrial Standards allow for traceability via labelling, proactive food safety systems and regulatory compliance.

Action by all

Whether it’s food security or nutrition, concerted efforts are needed to elicit change, from multinational corporations to individuals who transport, store and sell food. Take, for instance, food security. A lot of effort is being put into addressing food safety challenges, such as foodborne pathogens, spoilage organisms and their toxins. For this reason, many food companies in Nigeria are now using ISO 22000 for food safety management systems and adopting the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP), a food production monitoring system aimed at preventing contamination at the earliest stages. What’s more, manufacturers and food industry experts continue to curb inordinate practices such as the use of low-quality and raw materials, undeclared additives and food fraud.

A unified food quality and safety system is needed – particularly in countries with weak and fragmented food control systems – to achieve good-quality food that’s safe for consumption. But much more remains to be done. There is a need to address emerging viruses and antimicrobial resistance organisms, develop improved methods for identifying genetically modified organisms and increase the effectiveness of compliance along the food chain.

While many hurdles still need to be overcome, Nigeria’s food opportunities look bright. Despite the setbacks, the country’s agricultural sector is still considered to be the strongest and most developed branch of its economy. Nigeria’s diverse climate, which varies from tropical to subtropical, makes it easy to grow almost all crops in the region. And with ISO standards and SON’s work with national agencies, the country’s products are poised for competitiveness in local and international markets.

Source:iso.org

121/ New edition of ISO 22000 just out!

With over two hundred diseases spread through the food chain, it’s clear that safe, sustainable food production is one of our greatest challenges. Globalization of the food trade further complicates food safety and the new edition of ISO 22000 on food safety management systems presents a timely response.

Food safety is about the prevention, elimination and control of foodborne hazards, from the site of production to the point of consumption. Since food safety hazards may be introduced at any stage of the process, every company in the food supply chain must exercise adequate hazard controls. In fact, food safety can only be maintained through the combined efforts of all parties: governments, producers, retailers and end consumers.

Aimed at all organizations in the food and feed industries, regardless of size or sector, ISO 22000:2018, Food safety management systems – Requirements for any organization in the food chain, translates food safety management into a continuously improving process. It takes a precautionary approach to food safety by helping to identify, prevent and reduce foodborne hazards in the food and feed chains.

The new edition brings clarity of understanding for the thousands of companies worldwide that already used the standard. Its latest improvements include:

• Adoption of the High-Level Structure common to all ISO management system standards, making it easier for organizations to combine ISO 22000 with other management systems (such as ISO 9001 or ISO 14001) at a given time
• A new approach to risk – as a vital concept in the food business – which distinguishes between risk at the operational level and the business level of the management system
• Strong links to the Codex Alimentarius, a United Nations food group that develops food safety guidelines for governments

The new standard offers a dynamic control of food safety hazards combining the following generally recognized key elements: interactive communication, systems management, Prerequisite Programmes (PRPs), and the principles of Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP).

Jacob Faergemand, Chair of technical committee ISO/TC 34, Food products, subcommittee 17, Management systems for food safety, that developed the standard, says: “To meet the market needs for food safety, ISO 22000 is created by stakeholders who are involved in food safety organizations: governance, consumers, consulting, industry and research. When a food safety management system is developed by the users of ISO 22000, you make sure that requirements from the market are met.”

ISO 22000:2018 cancels and replaces ISO 22000:2005. Organizations certified to the standard have three years from the date of publication to transition to the new version.

Source:iso.org

 

122/ Taking food safety to a higher level

Can we trust current food security systems and are they sustainable? Some of the specialists involved in the revision of ISO 22000 explain why the new version of the standard is a timely response, for humans and animals, to the growing global challenges to food safety.

Technology has transformed our lives – from how we live to what we eat. Indeed, technology has transformed global food production, lifting people around the world out of poverty and starvation. That is the good news. The not so good news is that the use of fertilisers, agrochemicals and sophisticated irrigation techniques has resulted in a growing dependence globally on high-yielding crops, such as wheat, maize and rice, leaving us vulnerable to any failure in their supply chains.

More than seven billion people rely on these crops and with the United Nations projecting that figure to reach 9.8 billion in 2050, the pressure on our food systems will also grow. According to Prof. Sayed Azam-Ali, CEO of Crops for the Future, demand for food and animal feed is set to at least double over the next three decades. As we go deeper into the era of the so-called Fourth Industrial Revolution, we will need to leverage its new technologies – such as drones, artificial intelligence, robotics – to feed the world in a sustainable and affordable way and protect the planet’s natural resources.

Food safety in the balance

The issue made it on to the menu at Davos. In a special session at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2018, leaders from the food and agricultural industry, government, civil society, and meat and food technology companies recognized the triple pressures of rising middle-class demand, health issues linked to both under- and over-consumption of meat and protein around the world, and environmental sustainability, which requires changes to the global system of meat and protein production.

On the back of this, a new initiative was launched to shape the agenda for global meat and protein production to ensure a range of universally accessible, safe, affordable and sustainable meat and protein options to meet tomorrow’s demand.

Big business has been paying attention. IKEA, for instance, has been experimenting with sustainable food of the future – insects. The flatpack giant’s test kitchen in Copenhagen has been cooking up bug burgers – a recipe that combines beetroot, parsnips and mealworms – and algae-based hotdogs. The facts stand up: insects can help to take the pressure off overused food systems. And the animal feed industry can also benefit. From next year, the European Union is expected to allow insects to be used to make livestock food for poultry and pigs.

The need for food security is greater than ever. An outbreak of E. coli in the United States in April this year, for example, was linked to bags of romaine lettuce, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the country’s leading public health institute. The New York Times reported that nearly 70 % of people who were unfortunate enough to be infected were hospitalized with a toxin-producing strain of E. coli, and several developed kidney failure. And recent research at Queen’s University Belfast indicated that nitrates used in the curing process for processed meats can produce chemicals that cause an increased risk of colorectal cancer.

Add to the above an ever more complex food supply chain, a burgeoning global population, and the consequent strain on the world’s already stretched resources, and it’s not hard to see why the challenges to global food security and safety are causing concern and why leaders from all sectors are looking for solutions.

Meeting requirements

So how can we ensure a systematic way for food manufacturers to produce safe food for humans and animals? One such solution to help inspire confidence is ISO 22000, Food safety management systems – Requirements for any organization in the food chain. As we have seen, there have been many food safety challenges for users along the supply chain since the International Standard was first published in 2005, prompting the need for a revision.

Jacob Faergemand, Chair of technical committee ISO/TC 34, Food products, subcommittee 17, Management systems for food safety, and CEO of Bureau Veritas Nordic, an international certification agency, explains the major changes to the standard, which include modifications to its structure as well as clarifying key concepts. He says: “To meet the market needs for food safety, ISO 22000 is created by stakeholders who are involved in food safety organizations: governance, consumers, consulting, industry and research. When a food safety management system is developed by the users of ISO 22000, you make sure that requirements from the market are met.”

Faergemand cites the ISO 22000:2018 connection to Codex Alimentarius, a United Nations food group that develops guidelines for governments, as an important example of meeting market needs. “Due to Codex status and reference in national law, ISO 22000:2018 has maintained a strong link to Codex standards, which enables governments around the world to refer to ISO 22000:2018 in government inspections and as national requirements.”

He highlights a specific desire from food safety organizations to have a clear description of the differences between some key definitions – such as Critical Control Points (CCPs) and Operational Prerequisite Programmes (OPRPs) – which maintain alignment with Codex definitions as much as possible. Faergemand admits that it was challenging to find consensus on this important task, “but we have worked very hard and been very dedicated to developing this clear distinction to benefit the users of the standard”.

Ready for risk

One significant change to the standard was the introduction of the High-Level Structure (HLS) common to all the ISO management systems standards. As Faergemand explains, “this will benefit the organizations using more than one management system”. It also benefits organizations to take a different approach to understanding risk. “As a concept, risk is used in various ways and it is very important for food businesses to distinguish between the well-known hazard assessment on the operational level and the concept of business risk (presented in the new structure), where opportunities also form part of the concept.”

The new version of ISO 22000 also clarifies the Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle by having two separate cycles in the standard working together. “The two PDCA circles operate one inside the other – one covering the management system and the other, within it, the operations, which simultaneously cover the principles of HACCP defined by Codex,” Faergemand says.

HACCP (Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points), referred to above, is a system of principles that helps food business operators look at how they handle food and introduces procedures to ensure that the food produced is safe to eat. According to Hanne Benn Thomsen, a Senior Quality System Specialist at Chr. Hansen A/S, a global bioscience company that develops natural solutions for the food, nutritional, pharmaceutical and agricultural industries, the revised ISO 22000 standard goes beyond the “classical” HACCP principles, “increasing the focus on the risk elements when producing a food, to look at the supply chain more broadly ”.

She believes the strength in ISO 22000 is that it is acknowledged worldwide. “All companies within the food chain, directly as well as indirectly, can be certified against this standard and it is issued by an independent, non-governmental organization. By using this standard, we have a shared food safety language, which is commonly accepted worldwide.”

Partners in food

Benn Thomsen says that the new version of ISO 22000, as “a very generic standard”, is helping to set the framework for the systems that must be implemented to ensure food safety. Equally important, she adds, “it is also giving food organizations the tools to assess, identify and evaluate food safety hazards and, if an unlikely hazard should occur, how to reduce the impact on consumers as much as possible by being able to gain control of the impacted products”.

It is clear that government policy and international cooperation are key – in both the developed and developing markets – to push public-private cooperation on building a portfolio of protein solutions to meet tomorrow’s demands in line with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The new version of ISO 22000 is playing a key role in helping to meet SDG 17: “Partnerships for the goals”. Paul Besseling of Précon Food Management, and the official liaison officer from SC 17 in Codex Alimentarius, says: “For consumers and society as a whole, it is very important that authorities and businesses are using the same principles and approaches towards food safety. Alignment between laws and business standards must have high priority in food safety policy. The European Union supports the developments in ISO 22000.”

He underscores the significance of ISO 22000’s alignment with the Codex Alimentarius General Principles of Food Hygiene (GPFH), despite their inherently different roles. He says: “The purpose of the GPFH is to support and harmonize food safety authorities worldwide in creating their laws and subsequent official control or inspections. The purpose of ISO 22000 is to support food-business operators to comply with these laws, to meet customer requirements and to continue and improve their business.”

Building trust

Besseling says the new version of the standard has a better focus on external stakeholders of the food business. “This will help operators to understand the risks of unsafe food in terms of their business risk and will strengthen their position in the food supply chain.” In turn, for food safety authorities, the alignment is important because “it will support their work and makes their job easier”.

And finally, he says, for food-business operators, “it is very important that they can trust that their food safety management systems comply with relevant legislation and, ideally, legislative authorities are confident that food-business operators comply with the legal requirements when using ISO 22000 as their management system”.

Source:iso.org

 

Tin bài 21/6

123/ Japan initiates WTO dispute complaint against Korean duties on steel

Japan has requested WTO dispute consultations with Korea regarding Korean anti-dumping duties levied on stainless steel bars from Japan. The request was circulated to WTO members on 21 June.

Japan claims a thirds sunset review by Korean authorities which led to a decision to maintain the duties was not carried out in accordance with the WTO’s Anti-Dumping Agreement and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994.

Further information is available in document WT/DS553/1

What is a request for consultations?

The request for consultations formally initiates a dispute in the WTO. Consultations give the parties an opportunity to discuss the matter and to find a satisfactory solution without proceeding further with litigation. After 60 days, if consultations have failed to resolve the dispute, the complainant may request adjudication by a panel.

• More on consultations
• Current status of disputes

Source:wto.org

 

124/ Improving health with new standards for cleaner cookstoves

Each year, millions of lives are adversely affected by smoke released from cooking on open fires or simple stoves fuelled by wood, charcoal and dung. The much-awaited series of international guidelines for safer cookstoves, just published, aims to help.

Some three billion people around the world rely on polluting stoves and open fires to cook the family meals. Not only are these methods inefficient, the harmful smoke exposure can increase the risk of contracting a range of diseases such as lung cancer, pneumonia and stroke, contributing to nearly four million deaths a year¹⁾.

To help address the problem, ISO has developed a series of International Standards and related documents for cleaner, safer cooking solutions that will provide a platform for new and existing technologies to develop and grow. These include an International Standard on laboratory testing, a technical report on sector-specific vocabulary and a technical report for benchmarking lab testing measurements. Two of them have just been published, with the third due to be released later this year.

Ranyee Chiang, Chair of the committee that developed the standards and former Director of Standards, Technology and Fuels at the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves, said this is a positive step for the industry.

“Progress has been made, but with a global issue affecting three billion people, we must have ambitious goals,” she said.

“These standards will help to motivate and mobilize designers and companies to raise the standards of cookstoves and accelerate the market for new technologies that benefit consumers.”

ISO 19867-1, Clean cookstoves and clean cooking solutions – Harmonized laboratory test protocols – Part 1: Standard test sequence for emissions and performance, safety and durability, is the first ever International Standard for the testing of biomass cookstoves. Based on terms and definitions from ISO/TR 21276, Clean cookstoves and clean cooking solutions – Vocabulary, a new technical report establishing precise terminology for cookstove technology and testing, it specifies laboratory measurement and evaluation methods for the particulate and gaseous air pollutant emissions of cookstoves.

It will soon be joined by a Part 3 setting voluntary performance targets for cookstoves based on laboratory testing, which is due to be published in the coming months. Together, they will provide a useful portfolio of test protocols and laboratory measurement procedures to test the performance of cookstoves under controlled laboratory conditions.

The documents were developed by ISO technical committee ISO/TC 285, Clean cookstoves and clean cooking solutions, comprised of some of the world’s leading specialists from the clean cookstoves and fuels sector, with special expertise on testing, design, business and policy.

The committee is jointly led by ANSI, ISO’s member for the US, and KEBS, ISO’s member for Kenya, with a strong involvement from other developing countries for whom clean cookstoves are most relevant.

ISO/TR 21276:2018 and ISO 19867-1:2018 are available from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

Source:iso.org

 

Tin bài 22/6

125/ “Unprecedented challenges” confront Appellate Body, chair warns

Speaking at a public event on 22 June to present the WTO Appellate Body’s latest Annual Report, the Appellate Body chair, Ujal Singh Bhatia, said the body experienced an “extraordinarily strenuous year” in 2017 and now faces “unprecedented challenges” arising from the increasing number and complexity of appeals filed coupled with the ongoing stalemate over the appointment of new members. He urged WTO members to engage in constructive dialogue in order to address these challenges as a matter of priority. The text of his speech is below:

I would like to begin by expressing my gratitude to the DSB Chair, Ambassador Sunanta, for her presence and for her gracious consent to launch the Appellate Body’s Annual Report for 2017.

These are extraordinary times. The WTO dispute settlement system confronts two contrasting and yet related challenges that threaten its legitimacy as well as its existence:

• On the one hand, the dispute settlement system, which has for over two decades established its credentials as an efficient and impartial mechanism, faces the burgeoning pressure of increasingly complex disputes at various stages.
• On the other, some recent critiques have raised fundamental questions about the way the DSU should be used to resolve disputes.

These two challenges are clearly beyond the capacity of the dispute settlement system itself to resolve, and they call for determined political dialogue among WTO Members. Left unaddressed, these challenges can cripple, paralyse, or even extinguish the system. If they are properly addressed, the system can continue to discharge its mandate in the coming years with renewed vigour.

In what follows, I will look at the nature, dimensions, and content of these challenges, as well as the policy choices they represent.

An Overloaded System

Over the past two decades, the WTO dispute settlement system, including the Appellate Body, has been remarkably active. Since its inception, 551 disputes have been initiated by WTO Members, resulting in 230 circulated panel reports and 136 circulated AB reports. More than 65% of WTO Members have engaged in dispute settlement as complainant, respondent, or third party.

The high rate of compliance with DSB decisions testifies to the system’s success. Aside from the sheer number of disputes that Members have submitted to dispute settlement – which is a sign of empirical legitimacy – it is worth mentioning the almost total absence of instances where Members have chosen not to implement a ruling upon losing it. While losing parties have criticized individual rulings, “these critiques have rarely challenged the overall authority or legitimacy of the WTO judicial mechanism”.⁽¹⁾

But legitimacy is a fragile virtue, and its longevity cannot be taken for granted. This is a theme I will revert to later.

The expectation of DSU negotiators that only selected issues in key panel reports would be appealed was belied from the very early years. Since the beginning, a majority of panel reports were appealed on most of their findings. This has been a continuing feature of appeal activity in the WTO.

Last year was not an exception to this trend. The Appellate Body circulated five reports⁽²⁾ touching on, among other things, Members’ terms of accession to the WTO, the SPS Agreement, the Anti‑Dumping Agreement, the SCM Agreement, the Import Licensing Agreement, the GATT 1994, and the DSU. These disputes concerned myriad issues such as animal disease control, domestic tax regimes, and fair trade. The exceptionally large appeals in the Article 21.5 Airbus and Boeing proceedings⁽³⁾, filed in October 2016 and June 2017, respectively, occupied a significant portion of our resources throughout the year.

Eight new appeals were filed in 2017⁽⁴⁾, followed by another three in the first months of 2018.⁽⁵⁾ Such a heavy workload, coupled with our chronic resource constraints, caused some of these appeals to be staffed, and hearings to be scheduled, with delays of several months.

More disputes, including the complex Plain Packaging case⁽⁶⁾, will likely be appealed soon. By all indicators, the Appellate Body will remain very busy in the foreseeable future.

The workload of the AB over the years calls into question the basic premise of its establishment. Being an Appellate Body Member is no longer a part-time job. It requires full-time commitment to the WTO. Given the number, size, and complexity of appeals, coupled with the resources provided to it, the AB cannot be realistically expected to deliver high-quality reports within the timeframes prescribed in the DSU. Long delays in filling vacancies in the AB obviously do not help either.

Given the daunting mismatch between its workload and resources, the AB has undertaken several initiatives to simplify and streamline the content of its reports and its legal analysis. For instance, we are continuing the practice of annexing to our reports the executive summaries of the arguments submitted by the participants and third participants, instead of summarizing them. We are also providing more complete descriptions of our findings and conclusions, making our central reasoning more quickly accessible. Finally, we are striving for greater clarity and concision in our reasoning, making our reports more “user friendly” and the use of our limited resources more efficient. Except in some mammoth disputes such as the Aircraft cases, report length has been significantly reduced. None of the decisions issued in 2017, for example, exceeds 70 pages.

What the Appellate Body and panels can do to further improve the system, however, is not unlimited. WTO Members are entitled to initiate as many disputes as they wish. They are also entitled to make as many claims and to submit as many pages, arguments, and exhibits as they deem necessary. WTO Members expect – as they should – a modern, efficient, and effective dispute settlement system. But such expectations can be realised only if the resources allocated to it, and the procedures governing WTO dispute settlement, are aligned to the workload that WTO Members bring to the system. Discussions regarding the DSU deadlines, for instance, can be meaningful only if they are adequately contextualised. Discussions on consequences need to take on board the causes as well.

Overall, the growing incongruence between the disputes being referred to the WTO dispute settlement system, the resources allocated to it, and the rules and procedures governing it are together leading to very significant delays. The increase in compliance disputes over the past years is further adding to the problem. For example, the number of compliance panels circulated over the last five years has doubled compared to the previous five-year period.⁽⁷⁾

It is also no longer uncommon to see several years pass before a dispute is settled. This situation should ring alarm bells in a system that prides itself on its efficiency and business-like conduct, particularly in light of the prospective nature of WTO remedies. To the extent that delays in dispute resolution involve delays in the assertion of the rule of law, they provide an incentive to those who benefit from those delays. Lasting solutions, however, cannot target the symptoms. Rather, they must take into account the pertinent causes. WTO Members therefore need to engage in a dialogue to address all dimensions of this problem.

The Mandate of the DSS

That brings me to the second challenge confronting the WTO dispute settlement system, namely the critiques about the system’s adherence to its mandate under the DSU.

Article 3.2 of the DSU envisages the WTO dispute settlement system to be “a central element in providing security and predictability to the multilateral trading system”. Article 3.2 further provides that the system “serves to preserve the rights and obligations of Members under the covered agreements, and to clarify the existing provisions of those agreements in accordance with customary rules of interpretation of public international law.” It adds for good measure that “[r]ecommendations and rulings of the DSB cannot add to or diminish the rights and obligations provided in the covered agreements”.

It is against this backdrop that we need to reflect on the mandate that the WTO dispute settlement system enjoys. In this connection, I would like to offer a few comments and raise a few questions on two issues arising from recent debates:

• how the system should deal with ambiguity while clarifying the provisions of the WTO Agreements; and
• how it should address the issue of consistency of rulings in the context of the mandated need to provide security and predictability to the multilateral trading system.

Dealing with Ambiguity

First, a general comment on the issue of ambiguity in international agreements. While many provisions of international treaties are agreed upon in clear and detailed language, certain provisions may be couched in what international lawyers call “constructive ambiguity,” where consensus on precise language could not be reached during negotiations. In the WTO context, when a dispute arises in relation to such an unclear or ambiguous provision, adjudicators are to examine that provision in accordance with customary rules of interpretation and to apply them to the particular case. Some argue that where adjudicators encounter such ambiguity or lack of clarity, they should refrain from examining it and instead leave it for WTO Members to deal with. Others support the need for resolving the interpretative issue so as to make sure that disputes are not left unresolved.

Second, existing treaty language that is vague or ambiguous is distinct from lacunae in international law, that is, where no international law obligation exists. For us, the “customary rules of interpretation of public international law” mean those codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. They say we must begin with the plain text of the treaty provision, but it does not end there. Adjudicators have to discern the “ordinary meaning” to be given to treaty terms in their context and in light of the object and purpose of the instrument in which they appear, and they may have recourse to supplementary means. This interpretative exercise is meant to “clarify”, within the meaning of Article 3.2, the content, scope, and limits of treaty obligations even if they are somewhat unclear on the face of the text.

When adjudicators, having applied these interpretative tools, conclude that certain conduct is outside the scope of application of the treaty obligation invoked, they should have no hesitation in ending their analysis there. If an issue is not regulated in WTO law, WTO Members are entitled to act as they please. For instance, the Appellate Body in US – Section 211 Appropriations Act noted the absence of explicit provisions and of an implicit definition of trademark “ownership” in the TRIPS Agreement. The Appellate Body agreed with the panel that this definition “has been left to the legislative discretion of individual countries”.⁽⁸⁾

Third, the question arises whether there is a legal basis in the DSU for not deciding on claims, when the matter before the DSB would remain unresolved. Article 3.2 provides that the dispute settlement system serves to clarify WTO provisions in accordance with customary rules of interpretation. So how far should the dispute settlement system go in “clarifying” ambiguous provisions, and where are the limits? There appears to be a tension between the minimalistic approaches favoured by some and the requirements under Article 11 of the DSU for panels to make “an objective assessment of … the applicability of and conformity with the relevant covered agreements” and under Article 17.12 for the Appellate Body to “address” each issue of law and legal interpretation covered in the panel report that is raised during an appellate proceeding.

When we sit in judgement of specific cases, these issues are not always easy to resolve. It is true that the requirement to “address each claim” does not necessarily mean that we need to do so at length. But do these DSU provisions provide WTO adjudicators with the discretion to deny clarifying WTO provisions where such clarification is necessary to resolve the dispute? Do they permit adjudicators to deny exercising jurisdiction to resolve the dispute when it has been properly established?

In this connection it is important to note that a decision not to fully address an issue could, in effect, be a decision in favour of one of the participants, possibly altering the rights and obligations of WTO Members.

There are also cases in which Members raise an issue on appeal concerning “legal interpretations developed by the panel”, as contemplated by Article 17.6, without challenging the ultimate conclusion that the panel reached. In raising such issues, Members typically state that they are motivated by systemic concerns. Members may also be concerned about the effect that an interpretation by a panel may have on how they implement a different finding against them. And thus, if left unclarified, an ambiguous or incorrect interpretation may affect the rights and obligations of a WTO Member. In each scenario, the Appellate Body carefully decides, on a case-by-case basis, how to “address” the issue raised on appeal, including whether findings concerning the interpretation of WTO provisions are necessary in order to facilitate the prompt settlement and effective resolution of the specific dispute.

Consistency

The issue of consistency of rulings in WTO dispute settlement is closely connected to the mandated requirement for “security and predictability”. As is well known, one reason for creating the Appellate Body was to provide greater guarantees to WTO Members that panel reports would be subject to review, in the context of the adoption of the reverse consensus principle. The Appellate Body has taken the view that ensuring “security and predictability” implies that, absent cogent reasons, an adjudicator will resolve the same legal question in the same way in a subsequent case.⁽⁹⁾ At the same time, it needs to be emphasized that the Appellate Body’s approach does not call for a mechanistic or rigid application of this principle. Appellate Body interpretations of certain provisions have evolved over time, as evidenced by the number of AB reports interpreting Article XX of the GATT. Each case has to be considered on its own merits, and cases or issues that appear to be similar may be decided differently when they can be distinguished from earlier cases or when factual scenarios are different.

It is possible that there could be other judicial approaches to “security and predictability” that could emerge from reasoned debate among WTO Members. The AB would consider them when raised by participants in a dispute. But surely it is no one’s case that a tabula rasa approach, which consciously sweeps aside the past, could meet the requirements of “security and predictability” as outlined in the DSU. Those who are not enamoured of the need for “security and predictability” in the WTO need only to look at international investment arbitration, and the difficulties caused by the lack of consistency in first-instance arbitration rulings, as an immediate counterfactual of a system without a review mechanism for ensuring coherence and predictability.

Preserving the Legitimacy of the WTO’s Dispute Settlement System

My point is that a dispute resolution mechanism acquires its legitimacy, or indeed its wisdom, not from the statute that established it, but from the way it continues to meet the changing needs of its users. The global trading system has changed enormously since the WTO’s dispute settlement mechanism was designed and operationalised. The dynamics of global trading relationships have also evolved significantly. The rules and procedures of the system have clearly not kept pace with these developments. It is not for adjudicators to make law by their rulings. That is the job of WTO Members. But sustained inactivity on the legislative front puts more pressure on adjudicators, with attendant risks for the legitimacy of their rulings and their institutions.

WTO Members need to think clearly and deeply about the challenges that confront the WTO dispute settlement system. These challenges require reasoned and systemic dialogue that keeps at the forefront the enormous value of an effective system on the one hand, and the consequences of its paralysis on the other. The issues I have mentioned are meant only to provide some substance to such a debate.

Given the urgency for decisions regarding the AB, inaction is no longer an option. The year-long impasse on the process for appointing AB Members is debilitating the Body. Its reduced strength is undermining the collegiality of our deliberations, and the lack of proper geographical representation threatens its legitimacy.

I need not point out that the reduction in our numbers will cause further delays in appellate proceedings. Unless WTO Members take swift and robust action to remedy this situation, there may soon come a time when appellate proceedings are paralysed if fewer than three AB Members are available.

Such a paralysis would have profound implications on panel proceedings as well. Indeed, the Appellate Body and panels are part of one dispute settlement mechanism, and one cannot properly function without the other. Where a panel report is appealed, but an Appellate Division cannot be formed to hear that appeal, the adoption of the panel report is suspended until the Appellate Body can complete its proceedings. This would lead to the de facto demise of the negative consensus rule that has characterized the WTO dispute settlement system since 1995. Any losing party would be able to prevent the adoption of the panel report by appealing it to a paralysed Appellate Body.

The implications of the paralysis of dispute settlement for the WTO itself are also obvious. If rules cannot be enforced, is there a point to negotiating them?

New Challenges to Multilateralism

These challenges must also be discussed in the larger context of the recent challenges to multilateralism. We have witnessed significant unilateral trade measures by key WTO Members that have evoked countermeasures from affected Members. A number of disputes involving such measures have already been filed in the WTO. These disputes will test the WTO dispute settlement system to its limits. It is unfortunate that these developments are taking place at a time when the system is already experiencing huge stress. The current events are a sobering reminder of what is at stake and how the erosion of the WTO dispute settlement system could lead to the re-emergence of power orientation in international trade policy.

As noted, while the WTO dispute settlement system has to enforce existing international obligations, it also has to respect the limits of those rules and identify areas where national sovereignty is not constrained. But WTO Members also need to bear in mind the consequences of their actions on the effectiveness of the international system. In an interdependent world, global problems demand global solutions, and even national problems often require international cooperation.

I would like to conclude by stating the obvious – the institution of a standing body tasked with reviewing panel decisions is widely considered as the crowning achievement of the Uruguay Round of negotiations. Impairing that achievement would deprive the WTO of ensuring the principled and consistent application of multilateral trade rules.

It is our shared responsibility to maintain and preserve the trust, credibility, and legitimacy that the WTO dispute settlement system in general and the Appellate Body in particular have built over more than 20 years. WTO Members must embrace this responsibility and engage in constructive dialogue to ensure the continued good health of a system that is uniquely effective, but which cannot be taken for granted.

Notes

1. R. Howse, “The World Trade Organization 20 Years On: Global Governance by Judiciary” (2016) European Journal of International Law 27(1), p. 11. back to text
2. Appellate Body Reports, Russia – Pigs (EU); US – Anti-Dumping Methodologies (China); US – Tax Incentives; EU – Fatty Alcohols (Indonesia); Indonesia – Import Licensing Regimes. back to text
3. EC and certain member States – Large Civil Aircraft (Article 21.5 – US); US – Large Civil Aircraft (2nd complaint) (Article 21.5 – EU). back to text
4. EU – Fatty Alcohols (Indonesia); Indonesia – Import Licensing Regimes; Russia – Commercial Vehicles; US – Large Civil Aircraft (2nd complaint) (Article 21.5 – EU); EU – PET (Pakistan); Indonesia – Iron or Steel Products (Chinese Taipei); Brazil – Taxation; US – Tuna II (Mexico) (Article 21.5 – US) / US – Tuna II (Mexico) (Article 21.5 – Mexico II). back to text
5. Korea – Radionuclides (Japan); US – Countervailing Measures (China) (Article 21.5 – China); Korea – Pneumatic Valves (Japan). back to text
6. Australia – Tobacco Plain Packaging. back to text
7. Number of Appellate Body and panel reports circulated under Article 21.5 of the DSU: (a) period 2013‑2018: 10 panel reports; 4 AB reports; and (b) period 2008-2012: 4 panel reports; 4 AB reports. back to text
8. Appellate Body Report, US – Section 211 Appropriations Act, para. 189. back to text
9. Appellate Body Report, US – Stainless Steel (Mexico), para. 160

Source:wto.org

 

126/ Regional Trade Policy Course concludes in Almaty, Kazakhstan

The second Regional Trade Policy Course for WTO members and observers from Central and Eastern Europe, Central Asia and the Caucasus organized in partnership with the University of International Business (UIB) concluded on 22 June. Nineteen government officials from 11 countries attended the two-month course in Almaty, Kazakhstan.

The course included an address by Deputy Director-General Frederick Yonov Agah, who spoke about the importance of mainstreaming trade in national development plans and the role of trade in fulfilling the 2030 Agenda and the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This was followed by a question and answer session, which addressed themes ranging from trends in the multilateral trading system to the challenges faced by developing and developed economies in adapting to the changing global trade landscape.

The course was closed by the President of the UIB, Dr Darkhan Akhmed-Zaki, the General Director of the Centre for Trade Policy Development under Kazakhstan’s Ministry of National Economy, Mr Arman Abenov, and DDG Agah. Dr Akhmed-Zaki and Mr Abenov thanked the WTO for the partnership with the UIB and for the contribution it has made over the past two years towards enhancing Kazakhstan’s capacity to engage in trade issues. They reaffirmed their support for the WTO and its training and technical assistance programme.

The participants said that the course had deepened their understanding of trade policy, both at the regional and multilateral level, and had enhanced their capacity to benefit from WTO agreements.  They expressed their gratitude to the UIB and the government of Kazakhstan for the support and hospitality provided during their stay in Almaty.

Regional Trade Policy Courses (RTPCs) are “generalist” Level 2 training activities in the WTO’s Progressive Learning Strategy (PLS). These two-month courses are aimed at government officials working on trade issues who have successfully completed a PLS-Level 1 course. The training curriculum covers the multilateral trade agreements and includes a trade negotiations workshop and a final exam. A distinctive feature of RTPCs is their focus on regional trade policy issues and capacity building. To this end, RTPCs are organized and implemented in partnership with regional academic institutions and include regional academics and trade practitioners who co-lecture with WTO officials. One of the objectives of this approach is to foster networks among government officials, regional trade experts and regional trade institutions, with a view to enhancing dialogue on national and regional trade policy issues.

Source:wto.org

 

Tin bài 25/6

127/ STDF Annual Report highlights how to build safe and inclusive trade opportunities worldwide

The Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) launched on 25 June its 2017 Annual Report, which highlights how its global projects and knowledge exchange are helping to build safe and inclusive trade opportunities worldwide and championing the United Nations 2030 agenda for sustainable development.

As a global partnership, the STDF helps developing countries access international markets by addressing gaps in domestic sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) practices and promoting food safety, animal and plant health.

In 2017, with the support of 11 donors, the STDF approved nine projects and seven preparation grants, with 70% of resources going to help least developed countries (LDCs) and other low-income countries. Examples include supporting livestock producers in Ethiopia, opening up opportunities for Zambia to export plant-based products, and developing the cocoa value chain in Papua New Guinea.

During the year, the STDF led efforts to help developing countries benefit more from new technology through a global dialogue on electronic SPS certification and its role in facilitating safe trade held in July 2017 at the Aid for Trade Global Review and the ePhyto project. The STDF’s role in catalysing public-private sector collaboration on maximum residue levels in pesticides in Africa, Latin America and Southeast Asia was also recognized in a joint ministerial statement by 17 countries at the 11th WTO Ministerial Conference, held in Buenos Aires in December 2017.

The STDF report shows how good practices in food safety, animal and plant health have been helping small-scale farmers and processors in developing countries participate in trade to improve their livelihoods. New safe trade opportunities are supporting the Sustainable Development Goals including on zero hunger, decent work and economic growth and partnerships for achieving the goals. Women have been involved in many of the success stories, from shrimp farmers in Bangladesh and ginger cooperatives in Nepal to small-scale fishing in West Africa.

“The Annual Report shows that building SPS capacity enables more people to benefit from trade,” said Melvin Spreij, head of the STDF Secretariat. “This not only gives a boost to the economy, it drives up incomes in poor areas, promotes domestic food security, protects the environment, improves public health and empowers women. Mobilizing resources from governments, donors and the private sector has helped to sustain impacts even further,” he added.

Established by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the World Bank Group, the World Health Organization (WHO), the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) and the WTO, the STDF is financed by voluntary contributions. The WTO houses the STDF secretariat and manages the STDF Fund.

Source:wto.org

 

128/ DG Azevêdo: Government procurement is an effective tool to support women-led businesses

Government procurement, or the public purchasing of goods or services, is one of the most effective tools that governments have to support women-led businesses, Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said during a workshop on enhancing the participation of women in government procurement held at the WTO on 25 June.

“Governments are discovering how procurement policies can be used to break patterns of economic exclusion and deliver real, immediate benefits,” DG Azevêdo said. “Improving women’s access to this sector would unlock many opportunities for female entrepreneurs, with a direct impact on their economic wellbeing. The sheer size of the global public procurement market underlines the potential. It is estimated to account for around 15% of GDP in most economies. One element here is to lower barriers for small businesses,” he added. His full speech is available here.

DG Azevêdo spoke at the opening session of the workshop co-organized by Moldova, the WTO, the International Trade Centre (ITC), and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). The event focused on the participation of women-owned businesses and traders in government procurement markets and brought together specialists in the government procurement sector, representatives from international organizations, WTO members and experts.

“Public procurement can become an important policy tool to foster inclusive economic development, empowering women to fully participate in this process and reap the benefits, as the expenditure of public funds will go towards public benefits and will address concrete challenges faced by our societies,” noted Corina Cojocaru, a representative from the Government of Moldova.

“The WTO Government Procurement Agreement and procurement guidelines from international financial institutions are key ingredients to helping countries re-visit how they address the challenge to boost the participation of women in public procurement,” said Arancha González, Executive Director of the ITC.

“Since 2011, the EBRD has been working with the WTO on promoting better public procurement regimes in the countries where the Bank is operating. Procurement constitutes a very large share of GDP in every country and therefore every step in increasing transparency and efficiency of the procurement area has a huge positive effect on economic and social development,” said Norbert Seiler, Deputy General Counsel of the EBRD.

During the workshop, speakers highlighted the small share of public procurement business that is awarded to women-owned enterprises, estimated at 1% by the ITC. They discussed how the rules of the WTO’s Government Procurement Agreement can help women get access to public markets, domestically and abroad. WTO members shared best practices being applied in a number of countries, such as preferences in some tendering processes for companies certified as owned by female entrepreneurs. They also highlighted that supporting small and medium enterprises in participating in public tendering is a pathway to better inclusion of women, given their higher representation in this sector.

The organisers held the workshop to build on the Buenos Aires Declaration on Trade and Women’s Economic Empowerment. This initiative, launched at the 11th WTO Ministerial Conference in December 2017, has been endorsed by 122 WTO members and observers.

Source:wto.org

 

129/ Workshop on Trade, Gender and Government Procurement

Remarks by DG Azevêdo

Good morning everyone. I am pleased to join you at this important event.

I would like to thank the Republic of Moldova for organising today’s meeting, and for taking up the torch from Canada to continue the debate on trade and gender in the WTO. And I hope that this torch will be raised by many others as well.

Events like this are a vital opportunity to improve our understanding of the issues, to look with a critical eye at what we are already doing, and to shed light on what more we could do to empower female entrepreneurs to trade.

WTO members have chosen to place a real focus on these issues.

122 members have now signed up to the Buenos Aires Declaration on Women and Trade. Together they represent 75% of global trade. And of course participation remains open to all.

This huge support signals a strong belief among the membership that trade can create real opportunities for women’s economic development.

And the momentum continues to build. Members are acting on the commitments they made in Buenos Aires by working to deepen their discussions on these issues.

I would also note that, on a separate track, we have been working within the Secretariat to get our own house in order:

• First, we have appointed a Gender Focal Point – Anoush Der Boghossian – who is doing a great job keeping these issues high on our agenda.
• Second, we have been improving our coordination and capacity in this area, through our new WTO Action Plan on Trade and Gender.
• And third we are improving gender parity among the Secretariat through new HR policies and practices.

So I think we can point to progress on a number of fronts.

Of course today’s discussion builds directly on the Buenos Aires Declaration, and the pledge that members made to organise a series of dedicated discussions on gender-related topics.

Our focus in this session is on how to enhance the participation of women entrepreneurs and traders in government procurement.

You might well ask: what has government procurement got to do with gender?

It’s a fair question.

We don’t have the data to say conclusively to what extent women are excluded from government procurement opportunities. But it seems clear that there is a problem. Our colleagues from the ITC estimate that women entrepreneurs supply only 1% of this market.

This suggests that women are facing a range of barriers in accessing and winning procurement contracts. So I think improving this kind of information is a particular challenge that we need to grasp. Today’s workshop will contribute to this effort.

One thing we can say with absolute certainty is that procurement is one of the most effective tools that governments have to support women-led businesses.

The World Bank cites Australia, Canada, South Korea and the UK as examples here.

Governments in those countries are discovering how procurement policies can be used to break patterns of economic exclusion and deliver real, immediate benefits.

The sheer size of the global public procurement market underlines the potential. It is estimated to account for around 15% of GDP in most economies.

Improving women’s access to this sector would unlock many opportunities for female entrepreneurs, with a direct impact on their economic wellbeing.

One element here is to lower barriers for small businesses.

Women are relatively well-represented in this part of the economy – with around 40% of MSMEs being women-owned and led. In larger firms the proportion is much smaller. For example, just 5% of companies in the Fortune 500 are led by women. It’s not a perfect comparison, but it gives an indication of how important boosting MSMEs could be for women’s economic empowerment.

Lowering barriers for these companies to compete for procurement opportunities would have a positive effect.

But, in fact, this can be achieved by lowering the costs and complexity of participation across the board.

When barriers are lowered for all companies this can have a disproportionately favourable impact for MSMEs.

Improving online access to procurement processes and information is a vital step in creating a more level playing field for MSMEs. And I believe we will be hearing more about this during today’s session.

Another element which makes a big contribution in this area is the WTO’s Government Procurement Agreement – and particularly the modern, revised agreement which entered into force in 2014.

The GPA is the world’s principal tool for facilitating trade in relation to government procurement markets. It covers a number of economies of all sizes and stages of development. In fact, the revised Agreement expanded the market access opportunities it provides to around 100 billion dollars each year.

It promotes good governance mechanisms in government procurement, built around the WTO’s fundamental principles of non-discrimination, transparency and predictability. And it encourages the use of e-procurement tools that can further enhance accessibility and efficiency of procurement systems.

Taken together, these principles and features help to promote transparent access to public procurement markets, as well as better value for money for governments and citizens. Therefore this agreement has huge potential to enhance the participation of women entrepreneurs in this sector, enabling them to access new business opportunities.

However, we still need to bridge important gaps to ensure that these opportunities are more widely available.

For example, not all WTO members are part of the GPA.

At present it has 47 members, and 31 observers – some of whom are working to accede. So clearly we need to look at these issues with a different lens for those who are outside the GPA.

In addition, as I mentioned earlier, for many economies, we still lack data on the participation of women entrepreneurs in procurement markets.

Work here could help highlight the particular challenges women traders face. And it could encourage governments to think about how they can help them overcome these barriers.

I hope that today’s discussion will help shed light on some of these points.

We can do more to ensure that trade supports the economic empowerment of women. And in my view we must do more.

Government procurement is a crucial tool here – as is the GPA.

All the available evidence shows that giving women the same opportunities as men helps to improve competitiveness and productivity, which in turn impacts economic growth and poverty reduction.

So let’s keep working to that end.

I am proud to support the activities of WTO members – and of our own efforts within the Secretariat.

I hope you have a very constructive and positive discussion today.

I look forward to hearing about your deliberations, and to working together and take these issues forward.

Thank you.

Source:wto.org

 

Tin bài 26/6

130/ Launch of OECD book, ‘Trade Facilitation and the Global Economy’, at the WTO

Remarks by DG Azevêdo

Good morning everyone.

Welcome to our colleagues from the OECD. On behalf of the WTO, I am pleased to help launch this publication on Trade Facilitation and the Global Economy. I’d like to congratulate everyone involved.

I won’t speak for very long this morning. I just wanted to add my words of thanks and encouragement – and to underline a few notable elements of this excellent report.

The first point is that I think the report shows the critical importance of the Trade Facilitation Agreement.

We all know the potential that the TFA has to cut trade costs. This report takes a closer look at why this matters.

For example, it highlights the difference that this will make for MSMEs, which often face a prohibitively high cost of trading.

It also highlights the fact that inefficient border procedures multiply the costs when goods and components cross borders many times during their production.

This is the economic reality today. Nearly two-thirds of traded goods have components that were made in at least two different countries. Improving facilitation and lowering costs will help to remove obstacles to joining global value chains. And this will help new participants to join these chains of production.

So we need to keep working to implement the TFA.

Almost 85 per cent of WTO members have now completed their domestic ratification processes. This is great progress, but of course there is more to do.

There is a collective effort behind the implementation of the TFA. And we are very pleased to have partners such as the OECD lending their ongoing support – particularly to provide additional knowledge of what is actually happening on the ground.

This brings me to another notable element of this report, which is that it introduces the OECD’s new Trade Facilitation indicators.

Using information collected in cooperation with: (i) members; (ii) partner organisations; and (iii) the private sector, these indicators will be a very useful tool.

They will support the monitoring and benchmarking of countries’ engagement on trade facilitation, providing verified information on exactly what practical steps have been taken.

And, in this way, they will be of huge help to policy makers. They will allow them to assess the state of their trade facilitation reforms, highlight challenges and identify room for improvement.

This is of huge interest to governments, traders and other stakeholders alike. And it is a real boost to the implementation of the Trade Facilitation Agreement, complementing our work at the WTO.

This brings me to my final point, which is the importance of cooperation.

We need to keep fostering cooperation, not just amongst organisations, but also with the private sector and other partners who are engaged in trade facilitation reforms.

This has been a fundamental tenet of our work here over the years. And now that the Agreement has entered into force, cooperation continues to be key.

We see this in the TF Committee, which is going to meet right after this event.

The Committee has got off to a good start. It allows members to raise all matters related to the implementation of the Agreement. Delegations are regularly updated on the state of the notification and ratification process. And it is an opportunity for them to lend each other a helping hand – both in sharing their experiences and by offering technical support.

The WTO Secretariat also assists in every possible way – and I am heartened to see partners like the OECD willing to engage and play an important role as well.

The TFA continues to be a positive example for what is possible when we work together for a common cause.

This is one of many lessons that we learned from the whole TFA experience. And we should seek to apply it in other areas as well. It showed us the importance of flexibility and creativity in finding convergence among 164 members of vastly different economic and development status.

The Agreement is a truly inclusive endeavour. This was true of its design and its negotiation, and it will be true of its impact.

The TFA and its reforms will help smaller businesses to trade, including women-owned businesses. It will deliver greater gains to poorer economies. And it will provide technical assistance and capacity support for those economies in their implementation efforts.

So let’s keep working together to ensure that the Agreement is implemented as quickly and effectively as possible – to the benefit of all.

Thank you once again to the OECD, and to all of you, for your support.

Enjoy the debate this morning.

Source:wto.org

131/ WTO members take stock of progress on implementing Trade Facilitation Agreement

The implementation of the WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA) is well under way with progress varying among different economies, WTO members heard on 26 June in Geneva at the launch of a new publication and at a meeting of the Committee on Trade Facilitation. Continued cooperation among all stakeholders remains key to ensuring that the Agreement’s benefits of easier and less costly movement of goods are enjoyed by all, Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said.

“Almost 85 per cent of WTO members have now completed their domestic ratification processes. This is great progress, but of course there is more to do,” DG Azevêdo said at the launch of a new report entitled “Trade Facilitation and the Global Economy” published by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

“We all know the potential that the TFA has to cut trade costs. This report takes a closer look at why this matters. For example, it highlights the difference that this will make for MSMEs (micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises), which often face a prohibitively high cost of trading.  It also highlights the fact that inefficient border procedures multiply the costs when goods and components cross borders many times during their production,” DG Azevedo said.

“The Agreement is a truly inclusive endeavour. This was true of its design and its negotiation, and it will be true of its impact,” he said.

The report finds that trade facilitation measures are being implemented worldwide although the progress is uneven across different countries and across the various provisions of the TFA, OECD’s Julia Nielson and Evdokia Moise said at the book launch. Early improvements have been observed in areas such as automation and streamlining of procedures as well as engagement with the trade community, while the biggest challenge appears to lie in the cooperation of domestic and cross-border agencies, the report states.

WTO members heard further updates from the Secretariat on the implementation of the TFA at the Committee on Trade Facilitation meeting held after the book launch. The current rate of implementation commitments of the Agreement stands at 60.4 per cent as of 26 June.  Broken down by level of development, this equates to a 100 per cent rate of implementation commitments by developed members, 59.1 per cent among developing members and 21.6 per cent among least developed countries (LDCs) according to the TFA Database. The figures correspond to the portions of the TFA that have been legally committed to implementation. Developed countries committed to implement the Agreement in full upon its entry into force in 22 February 2017, while developing and least-developed members set their own timetables for implementing the TFA, taking into account their respective capacities. These commitments have been communicated to the WTO in a series of notifications.

Developing countries will immediately apply the TFA provisions they have designated as Category A commitments. For the other provisions of the Agreement, they must indicate when these will be implemented and what capacity building support is needed to help them implement these provisions, known as Category B and C commitments. These can be implemented at a later date, with LDCs given more time to notify these commitments.

So far, the WTO has received 113 notifications of Category A commitments, approaching the overall number of notifications in this area that is likely to be received. The current number of Category B commitments stands at 67 and at 56 for Category C.

Furthermore, the Committee meeting featured an experience-sharing segment that focused on the themes of regional approaches to trade facilitation and the provision of opportunities for public comment and consultations on regulatory procedures.

Members also considered the most recent notifications since the last Committee meeting and called on each other to submit the necessary information for transparency. They further heard updates on trade facilitation activities of fellow members and of the Trade Facilitation Agreement Facility.

The next Committee meeting will be in early October.

Source:wto.org

 

Tin bài 27/6

132/ ICC and WTO announce selection of new project under Small Business Champions initiative

The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and the WTO announced today (27 June) that a project proposal submitted by the Asian Association of Business Incubation (AABI) is the latest proposal to be selected under the Small Business Champions initiative. The project will help small businesses in Asia’s technology sector by matching them with partners who will assist them in areas such as cross-border technology transfer and identifying new trading opportunities.

The “Innovation Service Network” created by AABI will gather information about companies seeking cross-border cooperation, investment, marketing assistance or other business support and will match them with a member of the network who can provide the relevant know-how. By the end of 2018, AABI expects that at least 20 micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) will have benefited from the Innovation Service Network initiative.

WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said:

“This project will help small businesses to expand their knowledge and their horizons. I congratulate AABI on this idea and we look forward to seeing it implemented. I am very pleased to see the Small Business Champions initiative helping to develop new trade opportunities for MSMEs in Asia.”

ICC Secretary General John W.H. Denton AO said:

“It is crucial that small business shares in the gains of Asia’s strong economic and trade growth. I congratulate AABI for this fantastic initiative that demonstrates the commitment of business to a more inclusive trading system.”

Background

The ICC-WTO Small Business Champions initiative provides a platform for companies and private sector organizations around the world to propose innovative, practical ideas designed to encourage MSMEs to do business across borders. The call for proposals for the initiative was closed in December 2017. The ICC and WTO are exploring the possibility of running a second call for proposals, in light of the interest that has been generated by the initiative.

The announcement of this proposal brings the total number of selected proposals to seven. The first six successful proposals were submitted by Google, the Union of Chambers of Commerce of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Argentina’s Chamber of Commerce and Services and Mercado Libre, the Institute of Export and International Trade (UK), eBay and Brazil’s National Confederation of Industry. Once the projects have been successfully completed, the businesses will be recognized as ICC-WTO Small Business Champions.

Source:wto.org

 

133/ World MSME Day: DG Azevêdo cites WTO members’ progress in helping small businesses

Addressing a workshop organized by the Informal Working Group on MSMEs (micro, small and medium-sized enterprises) on world MSME Day (27 June), Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said that efforts by many WTO members have brought the MSME perspective to the fore. He cited progress in working with partners to increase trade finance opportunities for MSMEs. He also highlighted how implementation of the WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement will ease small businesses’ participation in global markets by cutting trade costs and reducing administrative burdens.

Excellencies,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Good afternoon everyone.

Let me start by wishing you a happy MSME day!

I am very pleased to join you this afternoon.

Let me congratulate you on the timing of this workshop. Firstly, because it coincides with the MSME day celebrations. And secondly, because the Brazil match doesn’t start for a few hours yet!

So I would like to thank Ambassador Shah for organizing this important event. My thanks also go to Ambassador Cancela of Uruguay for his leadership as general coordinator of the Group.

There’s no doubt that we have come a long way since the last MSMEs day.

WTO members have taken important steps to bring the MSME perspective to the centre of our discussions.

The joint initiative on supporting MSMEs, which was launched in Buenos Aires last year, is a clear sign of these efforts – and of the progress made. This work continues with real energy and enthusiasm behind it. Although we must acknowledge that some are not in a position to support it, this initiative remains open for any member to join.

So far this year, there have been a number of important discussions, including about the obstacles that MSMEs face in accessing information, and in accessing trade finance.

On the latter point, I gave an update to the Working Group on Trade, Debt and Finance earlier this month. And I was pleased to report some real progress.

We have been working closely with our partners to close the gaps in trade finance provision, which is a particular issue for MSMEs. And the multilateral development banks have responded through their trade finance facilitation programmes.

In 2016, these programmes supported around $22 billion in trade transactions. In 2017, this increased to $30 billion. And in 2018, it is estimated that over $35 billion of trade will be supported by these programmes.

This would amount to an increase of more than 50% compared to just two years ago.

There is much more to do – but this is very encouraging.

And of course trade finance is one issue which has been raised under the joint initiative.

I understand that discussions here are set to continue with a view to identifying specific actions that the Group could take.

And today the focus is on trade facilitation.

Complying with diverse standards, rules of origin requirements, and border procedures can be a huge stumbling block for MSMEs.

These are fixed costs that do not depend on a firm’s size. So while the bigger players may have the resources to absorb these costs, smaller firms are left behind.

Take Latin America, for example. Our 2016 World Trade Report found that domestic logistics costs in Latin American countries can add up to more than 42% of the value of total sales for MSMEs. That compares to 15-18% for large firms.

So what can we do to help resolve this problem?

Today’s discussion is an important step. We will hear from different experts and companies about what could be done in these areas, what is working, and what is not.

Implementation of the Trade Facilitation Agreement is a case in point.

By streamlining, simplifying and standardising customs procedures the TFA will help to cut trade costs and alleviate administrative burdens. And because these costs and burdens weigh most heavily on MSMEs, they stand to benefit the most from their removal.

And the TFA provides for other important avenues to ease MSMEs’ participation in global markets.

For example, the new national trade facilitation committees can provide a useful line of communication for MSMEs to give their views on a range of trade facilitation issues.

Similarly, the Committee on Trade Facilitation here in Geneva provides a useful forum to raise such issues. And of course the same applies to other WTO bodies which are relevant to this issue, such as the Committee on Rules of Origin for example.

There is huge energy behind this discussion – and huge interest as well, especially from the private sector.

As you know, we hosted another ‘Trade Dialogues’ event earlier this month, on behalf of the B20 and the ICC. The attendees were from developed, developing and least developed countries. And the companies they represented ranged from MSMEs to multinationals.

The organisers’ intention was to help members put some flesh on the bones of the various issues. And I think they did that. One of the discussion groups focused solely on MSMEs – and so I urge you to take a look at the report of their discussions, if you haven’t already.

They suggest that members should capitalise on existing tools, including the TFA. And they point to a number of steps that they would like to see governments taking – including making business-related information more readily available and accessible. The Global Trade Helpdesk that we are developing with the ITC and UNCTAD would make a big difference here.

Given the success of the event, there was a strong desire from business to keep this conversation going. And so I hope that further, more detailed ideas might be forthcoming in the near future.

I would also like, very briefly, to mention the Small Business Champions initiative that we support with the ICC.

This initiative was conceived as a platform for businesses to present and deliver their ideas for specific, practical projects which can help smaller companies join global markets.

There was a great response – with proposals put forward for awareness-raising campaigns, training schemes, and so on. In fact, we announced the latest successful proposal earlier today. It is from the Asian Association of Business Incubation. They are going to set up a knowledge-sharing network to help Asian MSMEs to start trading across borders.

We are now working to help deliver all of the projects under this initiative.

To conclude, it seems clear that this issue is really beginning to catch fire.

This is only the second year that we are marking world MSME day, yet already the issue seems well established.

Ultimately this is about ensuring that the trading system works for everyone – and that it is truly inclusive.

So I wish you a very productive session today.

Thank you.

Source:wto.org

 

134/ Australia’s accession negotiations for government procurement pact reach milestone – Chair

Prospects for concluding Australia’s negotiations to join the Government Procurement Agreement by end-2018 are growing, noted John Newham (Ireland), Chair of the Government Procurement Committee, at a meeting on 27 June 2018 which marked an “important milestone” for this accession. Discussions on the United Kingdom’s bid to join the Agreement in its own right kicked off at the meeting and WTO members approved Belarus as an observer to the Committee.

Parties to the Government Procurement Agreement (GPA) also reviewed progress in the accessions of five other WTO members, namely China, the Kyrgyz Republic, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the Russian Federation and Tajikistan.⁽¹⁾

Australia

GPA parties expressed hope that they could finalize Australia’s GPA accession negotiations before the end of the year through the adoption of a draft decision to be formally adopted in the last quarter of 2018. The decision will invite Australia to accede to the Agreement based on the terms set out in its final market access offer, which outlines to what extent Australia commits to opening its government procurement market to the current GPA parties. Australia has been negotiating its GPA accession since September 2015.

New requests

Belarus

GPA parties accepted Belarus’s bid for observer status to the Committee. It is the first country to ask to become an observer to the revised GPA while also negotiating its accession to the WTO. Parties welcomed Belarus’s announcement that it is considering initiating negotiations to become a full party to the Agreement once it is admitted as a WTO member.

United Kingdom

The United Kingdom presented its bid to join the GPA in its own right as it will cease to be a party to the Agreement under the umbrella of EU commitments after its departure from the European Union. Under negotiation is a government procurement market worth at least GBP 67 billion (USD 88 billion), the UK said (based on 2013 figures). As an EU member, the UK has participated in the GPA for over 20 years.

The UK’s initial market access offer and replies to a checklist on its national government procurement legislation were circulated to parties in June. The UK explained that, under the proposed offer, GPA parties will continue to enjoy the same level of entity coverage and of market access post-Brexit, as its offer replicates its current commitments under the EU. The UK also highlighted the urgency to agree upon its terms of membership in order to ensure its seamless continued participation in the Agreement after Brexit.

Further clarity was sought by parties on: a) details of the market access commitments the UK would be granting them; b) its EU withdrawal agreement, including timelines that would apply to the GPA; and c) the internal procurement legislation the UK intends to put in place. Several parties requested more time to review the documents on the table. The EU noted that no decision on a transition period has been taken yet.

The Chair welcomed the parties’ apparent recognition of their “collective interest” in seamless ongoing participation of the UK in the GPA post-Brexit, with several acknowledging the relative urgency to do so. “This is a very positive step forward,” he said.

The GPA aims to open up, in a reciprocal manner and to the extent agreed between WTO members, government procurement markets to foreign competition, and make government procurement more transparent. It provides legal guarantees of non-discrimination for the products, services or suppliers of GPA parties in procurement covered by the Agreement. The GPA is a plurilateral agreement — potentially open to all WTO members and binding only the parties to the Agreement. Currently, 47 WTO members (including the EU and its 28 member states) are bound by the Agreement.

Progress on other GPA accession talks

Several other WTO members are negotiating with the current parties their potential future accession to the Agreement.

China

A senior delegation from Beijing led by Mr Wang Shaoshuang, Deputy Director General of the Treasury Department of the Ministry of Finance, echoed President Xi Jinping’s ambition to speed up China’s GPA accession negotiations. An upcoming revised offer would likely include expanded coverage of sub-central governmental entities (proposed list of entities whose procurement would be open for competition⁽²⁾) and of state-owned enterprises (SOEs), Mr Wang said. The delegation also informed parties that its government procurement system is undergoing a process of domestic reform in line with the terms set out in the WTO’s GPA.

Citing a Chinese proverb, the Vice Minister said: “it takes two hands to clap”, and called on parties to express “pragmatic and reasonable expectations” that would give special consideration to China’s specific situation.

Parties urged China “to submit a credible and ambitious offer” that responds to their past requests for improvement. All the members that spoke expressed hope for prompt progress on this important accession.

The Chair encouraged China to submit a revised and improved market access offer swiftly.

China’s fifth revised market access offer had been circulated in December 2014.

Kyrgyz Republic

The discussions focused on a revised final offer that the Kyrgyz Republic had submitted a few days before the meeting. The delegation reiterated that joining the GPA remained a priority for them. “More time is needed for parties to review the revised offer on the table and to bring this accession to a conclusion without undue delay,” the Chair concluded.

Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and GPA parties further discussed the country’s “ambitious” initial offer, which mirrors the EU’s government procurement commitments under the GPA. It announced further improvements of its full-scale electronic procurement system to enhance efficiency and transparency and to ease access to the government procurement market for national and foreign operators alike.

These negotiations have made “an impressive start,” the Chair said, just one year after they were launched. Members expressed hope for the negotiations to be swiftly concluded. Some also expressed concerns with certain country-specific notes and derogations in the current offer.

Russian Federation

Russia informed parties about its upcoming revised market access offer and updated replies to the checklist. Some of the concerns voiced by GPA parties about the current offer include high thresholds (minimum values of contracts whereby GPA provisions would apply) and limited entity coverage, among other things. “This accession would have a very positive impact on world trade,” the Chair noted. Negotiations on Russia’s GPA accession kicked off a year ago, with an initial market access offer.

Tajikistan

Tajikistan said it intends to circulate a revised market access offer shortly. Among the outstanding concerns expressed by GPA parties are a price preference programme and transitional thresholds. Parties said they look forward to receiving the final revised offer. “This accession made good progress in the past and it would be a pity not having it conclude in the near future”, the Chair said. He encouraged the delegation to “submit a revised offer as soon as possible, taking into account parties’ concerns”.  Tajikistan’s latest offer was circulated in February 2017.

Other negotiations

Other countries with currently pending accession negotiations include Albania, Georgia, Jordan and Oman. In addition, Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Saudi Arabia and Seychelles have GPA-related commitments in their respective Protocols of accession to the WTO — resulting from negotiations with WTO members. The Chair suggested reaching out to these countries to propose technical assistance from GPA parties and/or the WTO Secretariat to reactivate the negotiations.

Outreach

The WTO Secretariat said various other WTO members expressed interest in potentially joining the GPA during several workshops it held across several continents on trade and government procurement.

Implementation of the revised GPA

Parties welcomed the update by Switzerland, who stated its Parliament is finalizing the adoption of the Instrument of Acceptance of the revised GPA. The document will then be reviewed by the Swiss cantons.

Switzerland is the last party yet to implement, through ongoing legislative reforms, the revised GPA, which was adopted in 2012 and entered into force in April 2014. The Chair called on Switzerland to finalize the procedures “as soon as practically possible.”

Work programmes

The Chair reported “good progress” on the work carried out by members on various agreed work programmes:

• small and medium-sized enterprises: members are working on a draft list of best practices to be circulated within the Committee;
• collecting statistics: members are working on improving their understanding of methodologies to collect data on procurement covered by the GPA;
• sustainability: the WTO Secretariat will circulate a draft report summarizing past work of the GPA parties. The document will be based on an outline provided by the parties.

GPA parties also discussed and were invited by the EU Commission to an international conference on the “Digital transformation of public procurement” to be held in Lisbon in October.

Note was taken of a Workshop on Trade, Gender and Government Procurement held at the WTO on 25 June 2018 at which WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said: “Improving women’s access to government procurement would unlock many opportunities for female entrepreneurs, with a direct impact on their economic wellbeing.” His remarks are available here.

New chair

GPA parties elected Carlos Vanderloo of Canada as the new Chair. Warm thanks were expressed for the service of the outgoing Chair, John Newham of Ireland.

Next

The next set of formal and informal plurilateral discussions of the Committee will take place in mid-October 2018.

The report on the last meeting of the Committee (March 2018) is available here.

Source:wto.org

 

Tin bài 28/6

135/ DG Azevêdo: “Our efforts in the WTO must translate into real trade gains for LDCs”

Addressing a meeting of the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) Group on 28 June 2018, Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said WTO members need to build on the progress achieved on LDC issues in recent years. He emphasized in particular the importance of implementing decisions taken at the Bali and Nairobi ministerial conferences on issues that are of importance for LDCs. He said that countries graduating from LDC status need special attention and that efforts need to be made on all fronts to boost LDC trade and to help achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.

Secretary-General Kituyi,

Excellencies,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Good morning.

First of all, I would like to thank Ambassador Leopold Samba for inviting me to address this important meeting – and to congratulate him for his work as the Coordinator of the LDC Group. I am pleased that UNCTAD Secretary-General Mukhisa Kituyi could join us this morning.

I applaud the LDC Group for taking the initiative to arrange this meeting. You are one of the most active groups in the WTO. This is reflected in the substantive progress that has been achieved on LDC issues over recent years.

It is vital now that we build on that progress and that we deliver on your priority issues so that LDCs can more fully benefit from global trade.

With this in mind I want to give you a full overview of the current issues this morning.

Let me start with some positive developments.

In 2017, global trade growth bounced back quite strongly. And the LDCs also experienced a trade recovery.

In 2017, the value of merchandise exports of the LDCs increased by 13%. This is remarkable as it follows three years of negative growth rates.

Thanks largely to increases in the prices of fuels and mining products, LDC exports grew faster than world exports by value. However, despite these developments, the share of LDCs in world merchandise exports only improved slightly. It remains below 1%.

The expansion of global trade is expected to continue if economic growth remains robust. However, as you all know, we face challenging times. Trade tensions persist between major trading partners.

Many measures that restrict trade have been announced in recent days and weeks. If we continue down this path of further escalation, we will be facing not only the obvious economic risks, but also major systemic risks.

I am in close contact with the key players and urging them to show maximum restraint. Of course what happens next is ultimately in their hands, but all members have a stake in this.

In today’s interconnected economy, the escalation of trade tensions would have damaging knock-on effects which would reach every economy – and it would not spare LDCs. Similarly, potential threats to the future of the trading system should be a concern for us all.

Now let me turn to MC11.

I won’t take up any time by reminding you what was agreed in Buenos Aires. You were all there. I will just say that while we didn’t achieve all we may have wanted, we did make important progress.

Since then work has resumed in the respective bodies. I have continued my engagements with members – both in Geneva and in capitals.

In terms of substantive progress in the different areas, I would just say that it is still quite early in the process after the ministerial. All of the Negotiating Groups are up and running again and members are meeting and engaging – but these are still early days.

The Negotiating Group on Rules remains a notable bright spot. The group is proceeding with a real sense of urgency and is proceeding with its programme of work to advance discussions on fisheries subsidies.

I understand that an outcome on fisheries subsidies is of great interest to many LDCs as significant sections of your population depends on the earnings from this sector. With this in mind, I must say that if we are to meet the 2019 deadline that was set in Buenos Aires, we will have to shift gears.

It won’t be enough for members to simply continue restating (i) how important this issue is for them; or (ii) what their sensitivities are – we need new ideas that could lead to convergence.

So far I don’t detect any real attempts or efforts to change positions. So, in all of my interactions with ministers I have been urging them to get engaged and to begin making much needed political calls.

We also need to find ways of advancing in other areas as well.

Agriculture and development are two of the most critical areas. But they are also the more difficult ones before us. And in both areas I think a more meaningful conversation is needed. We also have to deal urgently with issues such as public stockholding, where the deadline that members set has already passed.

I understand that the next Agriculture Special Session is scheduled for 16 July – followed by a dedicated discussion on Public Stockholding and the SSM.

So I would encourage you to continue this work.

On S&D treatment, you all are aware of the discussions on development that took place at MC11, and the divisions which came to the fore.

Since then the Chair has been meeting the stakeholders in various formats. And I understand that in her recent consultations, a number of suggestions and ideas have been put forward.

We are confronting two major issues here:

• First, we need to have a frank discussion on the specific needs of developing countries, especially the LDCs, as we take forward the different proposals.
• Second, we need to be realistic in what we could achieve given the sharp differences in perspectives of members on how S&D treatment should be approached in the WTO.

I understand that members are showing interest in further exploring some of the useful ideas that have been put forward in the Chair’s consultations after MC11. I would encourage you to approach this with a pragmatic mind-set, and focus on a few proposals which you think are most important in achieving your development objectives.

There is an opportunity here for constructive dialogue, building on the conversation that began in Buenos Aires. We should seize that opportunity.

Moving on to LDC-specific issues, we need to continue working to implement the important decisions that were taken by members in Bali and Nairobi.

Let me say a word or two about each of these areas.

On duty-free and quota-free,we should acknowledge that the LDCs now enjoy comprehensive coverage in most developed countries, as well as in several developing country markets. Nevertheless there is clearly scope for further improvement.

The strong progress we saw after Hong Kong and after Bali has slowed.

To move this file forward, I think you will need to develop specific proposals especially on implementation of DFQF market access and engage directly with the relevant stakeholders.

On preferential rules of origin, we are making good progress. Last year, the Committee on Rules of Origin adopted a new template for the notification of preferential rules of origin. And almost all preference-granting members have already notified using this template.

The Committee has also started an examination of preference utilization rates.

This work will help members better understand to what extent LDC exporters make use of the preferences available, and identify possible areas for improvement.

In addition, a number of preference-granting members have informed the Committee on the measures that they are undertaking in order to simplify their rules of origin requirements. This is yet another positive sign.

Moving on to the LDC Services Waiver …

We have received 24 notifications from members with measures in favour of LDC services and service suppliers. I understand you have done some analysis on the content of these notifications and have also engaged with members.

It is important that we make progress on this file in order to support your services suppliers to make use of the opportunities provided.

In light of the experience gained so far, you could consider submitting specific recommendations in the Services Council on how you would like members to adopt measures that would support your services sector.

So that’s where we stand on the specific issues, but let me make a broader point.

We are here today to reflect on MC11, so I think we have to face up to the fact that there are deep divisions and frustrations among the membership. These concerns connect with issues of both substance and process.

For instance, everyone agrees that the Doha issues should be tackled – but some argue that no other issue should be discussed until that work is complete.

That may be a legitimate aspiration – but it inevitably leads us to an impasse:

• First because we know that we are nowhere near completion of the Doha work programme,
• and second because others (while still very interested in advancing the Doha issues) clearly also want to discuss other areas.

We saw this clearly in Buenos Aires, with the various joint statements by large and diverse groups of members covering:

• e-commerce
• investment facilitation,
• MSMEs, and
• women’s economic empowerment.

Although we must acknowledge that some do not support these initiatives, it is clear that they are gaining a lot of momentum. Many members have been engaging actively on these issues. Numerous open-ended meetings have been held this year, and numerous submissions have been tabled.

In every conversation I’ve had so far, proponents assured me that:
(i) these conversations are meant to complement, and not to replace or brush aside other multilateral efforts; and
(ii) these initiatives will remain open to any delegation that wants to join in.

Finally, I want to mention another issue that has gained prominence in recent years – and that is LDC graduation.

A good number of LDCs are expected to graduate from LDC status in the near future. The international community puts a special emphasis on smooth transition so that there is no sudden disruption of support to the graduated LDCs.

I absolutely agree that graduating LDCs need special attention and that the graduation process needs to be well prepared.

I note that your ministers called for positive actions on graduation in their LDC Ministerial Declaration in Buenos Aires. I also noted the specific proposal that you have tabled in the context of the SCM Agreement.

I encourage you to continue engaging with members, and explain the challenges that can arise in the post-graduation period.

On behalf of the Secretariat, I can assure you that we are ready to help in any way we can. And let me stress that this applies to every issue I have raised here today. The Secretariat remains at your service.

It is my firm belief that our efforts in the WTO must translate into real trade gains for you.

I think you can see this in many elements of our work. For example, we continue to place a major emphasis on addressing the trade capacity needs of LDCs.

Just a couple of weeks ago, the EIF Global Forum on LDCs was held here at the WTO. The global development community was there, meeting with representatives from more than 40 LDCs.

We need to keep pushing on all of these fronts to boost LDC trade, and to help achieve the SDGs. This remains a personal priority for me – as well as a priority for the whole institution.

So I look forward to working with you in the coming weeks and months to advance all of this work.

But let me stress once again. We can’t achieve any of this without the platform of shared rules that the WTO provides. Without the WTO, we would be returning to a system of ‘might makes right’. And in such a situation we all know that the smallest economies would stand to lose the most. But we should also be aware that, should the system be compromised, even the mightiest WTO members will also be worse off.

So we must all fight to maintain and strengthen the WTO. Again, it is not perfect, but it’s the best we’ve got.

Thank you for listening.

Source:wto.org

 

136/ Committee reviews concerns regarding palm oil production, fossil fuel subsidies

Members discussed environmental concerns regarding the production of palm oil and highlighted the impact of fossil fuel subsidies at a meeting of the Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE) on 28 June, 2018. Several Members shared their practices and perspectives on the link between environmental challenges and economic and social goals, and underlined the importance of promoting trade and environment policies in support of sustainable development.

Malaysia and Indonesia provided information on sustainable management of natural resources with a focus on palm oil. Indonesia sought to address what it said were misconceptions about the production of palm oil and its environmental effects. Given the importance of the sector to Indonesia and Malaysia’s economic development, the two stressed the importance of sustainability, taking into account international standards, best practices, forest fire management, employment and productivity.

New Zealand outlined recent developments regarding fossil fuel subsidy reform. It noted the trade-distortive nature of fossil fuel subsidies and the pollution generated from the production and consumption of fossil fuels. New Zealand urged the phasing out of these subsidies, and  referenced the Ministerial Statement  on Fossil Fuels Subsidies Reform signed by 12 members during the 11th WTO Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires last year. In this regard, New Zealand stated the belief that the WTO could act as a forum for members to advance this initiative.

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) also shared its recent study “OECD Companion to the Inventory of Support Measures for Fossil Fuels 2018”.  The OECD publication tracks progress on reform of fossil fuel support. The study found that support for fossil fuels overall remained high despite signs of decline among OECD countries.

Norway provided a presentation on “Building a Sustainable Ocean Economy”, making the case for the development of the “blue economy.” UN Sustainable Development Goal 14 was highlighted, which speaks to the conservation and sustainable use of oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development. Acknowledging the tremendous economic potential of oceans, Norway shared its policies and practices to encourage the growth of ocean-based industries, incorporate green technology in the blue economy, and address serious environmental challenges such as the rise of plastic and marine waste.

Australia made a presentation to the CTE focused on its climate change actions and challenges. A link was made between rising temperatures associated with climate change and the intensification of natural disasters. As a result, Australia has incorporated climate-resilient development approaches through policies geared towards emissions reduction.

Chinese Taipei presented a non-paper on their perspective regarding climate change and ways to support the implementation of the Paris Agreement.

The WTO secretariat introduced its Environmental Database for 2016. Following the recommendation of the CTE in 1996, the database seeks to enhance transparency of trade-related environmental measures which are notified by members under the WTO agreements, in trade policy reviews, and which are included in preferential or regional trade agreements. The most common types of environment-related objectives included: chemical, toxic and hazardous substances management; general environmental protection; and energy conservation and efficiency. The secretariat also highlighted their latest publication on Mainstreaming Trade to attain Sustainable Development Goals, available here.

Australia also reported on the state of negotiations for the Environmental Goods Agreement (EGA). Finally, presentations were received from observer organizations such as United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the International Maritime Organization (IMO). Ahead of the 24th Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC, good progress had been made; however more movement was needed on issues such as climate finance and transparency. The IMO announced its initial plan to substantially reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from ships. Given the scale of the sector and the expected growth due to increase demand, emissions are projected to rise between 50% and 250% if left unchecked. To combat these projections, the strategy seeks to reduce emissions by at least 50% by 2050 compared to 2008, while at the same time pursuing efforts towards phasing them out entirely before the end of the century.

Source:wto.org

 

Tin bài 29/6

137/ DG Azevêdo underlines critical role of IP laws in supporting growth and development

The framing and enforcement of intellectual property (IP) laws has a significant impact on global growth and development, said Director-General Roberto Azevêdo at the closing session of the IP Researchers Europe Conference held in Geneva on 29 June. He underlined that IP has a big role in particular in helping to generate the innovations that will be needed to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. The conference was integrated with the annual WIPO-WTO Colloquium for IP Teachers, which brought together participants from 26 countries from 18 to 29 June.

Excellencies,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Good afternoon.

I am pleased to be here to close this important event – the first IP Researchers Europe Conference, integrated with the annual WIPO-WTO Colloquium for IP Teachers.

The format of today’s event has been innovative. For the first time, the colloquium is concluding its two-week programme by integrating with a fresh initiative, the IP Researchers Europe Conference.

I hope that this has led to even more productive and constructive exchanges. I look forward to hearing in more detail about the results of the scholarly debate.

I would like to thank everybody who has contributed to this initiative, including

• our hosts at WIPO, in particular my friend DG Gurry,
• WIPO Academy executive director, Mr Sherif Saadallah,
• and their teams.

In addition, my thanks go to the University of Geneva, in particular Professor Jacques de Werra, as well as to Professor Irene Calboli.

And of course, I also want to thank our colleagues in the WTO Secretariat.

It is very encouraging to see such strong interest in intellectual property, and that this is coming from both young and experienced academics alike.

The law and policy of intellectual property is known for being a technically complex subject. At the same time, it is fundamentally important for a host of public policy issues.

It is hard to think of a global issue today that does not have a significant intellectual property dimension.

Consider public health, innovation and access to medicines. Consider climate change and the development of green technologies. Intellectual property is central to these issues.

And of course, it is also a big issue when it comes to trade as well.

You only need to glance at the headlines today to see the linkages between intellectual property and trade. And it’s clear from these same headlines that the relationship can be complex or even controversial.

For example, intellectual property is a key concern in the current tensions which we see rising between major trading partners.

And just yesterday, a WTO panel report was issued regarding Australia’s plain packaging measures for tobacco products. It looks at the consistency of these measures with the TRIPS Agreement and WTO law. The report on this dispute addresses these questions in detail.

The WTO’s TRIPS Agreement connects with a wide range of legal and policy issues.

This includes human rights, the environment, food security, the digital divide, innovation policy and many aspects of sustainable development.

We know that these issues can be difficult and at times divisive. Yet, the TRIPS Agreement itself articulates the objective of the IP system in positive sum terms.

It refers to mutual benefits for both the producers and the users of new technologies. And it is clear about IP’s role in promoting social and economic welfare.

How to achieve that in practice, and how to learn from the experience accumulated to date, is a big challenge for the international community.

Adding to that we have also seen a number of recent developments.

Last year the TRIPS amendment came into force. This was the first amendment to WTO rules in the history of the organisation. The amendment creates a new legal pathway for access to affordable generic medicines in the most vulnerable countries. As such, it finds a central place in many of the debates about the IP system as a tool for public policy.

This amendment builds on the Doha declaration on the TRIPS agreement and public health. With this declaration, trade ministers all over the world stated that public health is of overarching interest and concern. And they stated that WTO rules – specifically the TRIPS Agreement – must form a positive part of the solution.

Following the Amendment’s entry into force last year, we are now working to build capacity and the necessary partnerships to put this important new legal tool into practice.

Legislators, policymakers, administrators and the judiciary are all seeking to give practical effect to the broad principles of TRIPS. And so, there is clearly a vast amount of practical experience that we can build on.

It is essential that we learn these lessons. How we frame, administer and enforce intellectual property laws has a significant impact on growth and development around the world.

Recognising the critical role of the intellectual property system is also essential to help deliver on the Sustainable Development Goals.

Intellectual property has a big role in helping to generate the innovations that will be needed to achieve these ambitious goals.

Expert guidance is crucial to help policymakers navigate this challenging policy landscape.

That is why the role of researchers in IP law and policy is so important. They help to provide valuable insights on where we are today. They also help to provide ideas and tools to chart the way ahead.

IP academics and their research can help countries and policymakers develop the domestic IP systems that they need to achieve specific policy objectives.

Today’s event is clear proof of that. The colloquium has been a fixture of the cooperation between WIPO and WTO, since it was created in 2004. Now it has been augmented by today’s conference for researchers. And this has evidenced the diversity and significance of contemporary research in this area.

One of the real strengths of the Colloquium is that it is a true conversation among academics and our organizations.  It has also helped to build a platform that involves academics and universities from all around the globe, from developed and developing countries.

As a result, the Colloquium has given rise to a remarkable network of alumni, who have gone on to play major roles as academics and as policymakers.

The rising demand and positive feedback for this initiative has been very encouraging. Therefore, we have decided to expand this initiative and develop a series of regionally-based sessions – this started last year in Asia, continued earlier this year in Africa, and we hope, soon, will turn to Latin America.

The Colloquium has also yielded an important peer-reviewed academic journal,the WIPO WTO Colloquium Papers. It provides a unique collection of research focused on the developing world, where we are seeing many interesting policy developments in the IP field.

I encourage participants to learn more about this initiative.

In conclusion, it is my hope that this seminar today has stimulated a constructive dialogue, and laid the foundation for continued collaboration and the fostering of academic networks.

As researchers, teachers, and participants in public policy debates, we need you to keep helping us understand the important developments in this challenging field. Your work can help illuminate this fascinating legal and policy landscape.

So thank you all for participating in today’s event, for your intellectual curiosity, and for your cooperation.

Let’s continue this good work.

Thank you and good evening.

Source:wto.org

 

138/ DDG Wolff: “For trade to flow there needs to be a high degree of certainty”

Speaking at the Closing Ceremony of the World Trade Institute Master Programmes in Bern on 29 June, Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff emphasized the importance of the rule of law in an age of conflict. He underlined that businesses require the rules to be clear and predictable in order to trade across borders and that uncertainty slows or freezes investment. He acknowledged that a system of rules requires periodic updating to remain fully relevant and stressed how technological change will impact the WTO of the future.

The Rule of Law in an Age of Conflict”

Alan Wm. Wolff
Deputy Director-General
World Trade Organization⁽¹⁾

Keynote Address at the Closing Ceremony
World Trade Institute Master Programmes
University of Bern
29 June 2018

My special thanks to the World Trade Institute and Professor Peter Van den Bossche for the invitation to join you on this important occasion.

Months ago, when I proposed this topic, The Rule of Law in an Age of Conflict”,⁽²⁾ I did not anticipate fully how much the subject would be enriched by the size and scope of the trade conflicts that either exist today and appear to be imminent — nor did I anticipate the apparent diminution of the role of law.  Law in this context consists of the rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO).  Only Dr. Pangloss in Voltaire’s Candide could explain to you why these developments are positive. But I can nevertheless see some opportunities for progress in what otherwise would see a dystopian landscape.  Under the heading “A crisis is a terrible thing to waste,”⁽³⁾   In fact, there are now the beginnings of some positive reactions.

The daily headlines scream of trade war.  The WTO is at present in the eye of the storm.  On the East Coast of the United States, where I come from, hurricanes in the summer months would move up the Atlantic Coast from the Caribbean.  Whirling high winds have at their center an area of eerie calm.  That is where we are now, at least for the moment.  The WTO continues with its daily work, administering a myriad of international agreements through committees of members, preparing reports and discussing what additional disciplines would be useful in a wide range of areas, from e-commerce to agriculture.  The media, with reason, focus on the drama of likely wind damage.  The institution, the WTO, largely goes on about its business, like Londoners both before and during the Blitz.  How much storm damage there will be is still speculative.

The stated and unstated causes of the trade conflicts, are reasonably clear.  More than a few members appear to be nursing grievances — real enough to them.  Unless one assumes cynicism on the part of some or all parties, this is what creates all conflicts: the combatants believe that they are entirely justified in their opposing points of view.  This dynamic caused a large number of wars in Europe over at least half a millennium.  In the United States, in the middle of the 19th century, the issue of whether the union was a soluble compact based on states’ rights or one nation indivisible cost the lives of 620,000 Americans — a number equal to half of all Americans killed in war throughout the nation’s history.  This was in essence a rule of law question, the law at issue being the U.S. constitution.  The differences could not be resolved by debate. In the trade area, we are supposed to do better.  It is still uncertain that we will.  What is at stake is not the effusion of blood, but the contraction of international commerce and with it the reduction of global economic well-being.  There has been nothing like this since the Second World War.  The last systemic threats to world trade occurred during the Great Depression in the 1930s.

While there are high risks, I do not subscribe to an apocalyptic vision of the future.  And, as an impartial international civil servant, I am to make no comment on the validity of any of the causes of current trade conflicts.  The reason for not making any judgments here goes beyond enforced neutrality or timidity.  Some degree of humility requires study of any WTO Member’s concerns in greater depth before coming to an immutable conclusion.

Where do matters stand today? The starting point is that all WTO members profess that they agree on the importance of the multilateral trading system.  Once that overarching point has been articulated, significant divergences emerge.  Many developing countries believe that the current system has become burdensome without delivering sufficient benefits.  I would guess that each of the 164 members, without exception, believes that the disciplines on others are not as good as they should be.  Some no doubt believe that certain of the obligations fall too heavily on them, especially if their commitments are nominally greater than those of others.  A number of Members may hold the view that moving by complete consensus means no movement at all, that the privilege of inclusiveness, in one instance or another, is abused.  Others may consider this a source of reassurance that their voices will be heard.  The leader of one major country has stated that all past trade agreements disadvantage his country.  Dissatisfaction is in many respects widespread.

In short, in the community of nations, all is not permanent tranquillity and good feeling.  This has in fact always been the case and perhaps always will be. However, if the history of international trade relations were graphed, this would not be considered a high point of international harmony.  The governance, meaning management, of international commercial relations is undergoing serious stress.  The answer to smoother relations besides good will is to be found in the rule of law. Sometimes this means living up to the rules as they are, and often it refers to rules as they should be.

It is worth trying to distil some principles with respect to the rule of law and try to relate them to the trade conflicts that are currently in place and impending.  In order for trade to flow there needs to be a high degree of certainty.  Businesses, even those consisting of one person or just a few, require the rules to be clear and predictable in order to attempt to ship a good or provide a service across a border.  For major international companies, uncertainty slows or freezes investment.  The early signs of slowing cross-border investment have already appeared.  For all of us, consumers, distributors and producers alike, in short for most of the world’s inhabitants who engage in trade, uncertainty diminishes economic activity, and that effects all.

I cannot speak to you ex cathedra to deliver unquestionable universal truths.  WTO Deputy Directors General do not occupy that kind of seat, so I will put to you some hypotheses, eight propositions, and you can decide for yourselves whether they are valid.

First proposition: Civilization is necessarily based on the rule of law.  Sustainable trade relations require a foundation in rules and commitments that are complied with.

That civilization is necessarily based on the rule of law is demonstrated by the serried rows of Qin dynasty terra cotta warriors unearthed in Xian; the Code of Hammurabi; the Bible; the Koran; the teachings of Solon; Pax Romana; the U.S. and British Constitutions; the Code of Napoleon; the Treaty of Rome of the European Union; and for the sphere of current international commerce, the GATT and other WTO agreements.  Whether autocracy or democracy, whether through the application of force or freely determined consensus, legal systems are created under which peoples live.  Wherever one looks, wherever there is society, there are rules.  The alternative is chaos.

Current events highlight the reason for the WTO’s existence.  As one of the chief critics of the current system, a trade minister, is quoted as having said “If the WTO did not exist, it would have to be created.”  My assumption is that what he meant was that for international commerce to thrive, the rule of law is a necessary precondition.

The presence of law does not suggest that there will be no conflicts.  To the contrary, law exists because there will always will be differences that are not automatically reconcilable.  This is as true for the rules needed for traffic entering a round-about as for international commerce.  Interests and perceived interests clash.  In the world of geopolitics as well as of trade, given that there will always be conflicts, the question is how they will be managed.  At the global level, where sovereign nations interact, what needs to be achieved and maintained is governance without an overarching world government, as the latter is not only not achievable but not desired.

Conflicts have been managed successfully in the GATT and in the WTO.  In 1965, the U.S. and the European Communities (EC) engaged in a “Chicken War”, which at the time no doubt did feel like war, although by today’s standards it seems like only a skirmish.  The formation of European Common Market resulted in the curtailing of U.S. chicken exports.  Under the GATT rules, the U.S. countered by imposing additional duties on brandy, dextrose, potato starch and light trucks.  The idea, which will find resonance in how decisions are made today on which products to choose for the application of retaliatory duties, was to inflict pain on specific members of the EC.  The 25% tariffs on light trucks, legitimate under the WTO rules, stuck, even after the chief source of imports was no longer Europe but Japan, and later it affected trade from Korea, and would affect future trade from China and other sources.  Once protection is granted it can prove difficult to remove.

This last month, the EU chose to impose retaliatory tariffs on bourbon and Harley Davidson motorcycles, not coincidentally manufactured in the home areas of the Majority Leader of the U.S. Senate and the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives.  The idea is to get the attention of the other side so that there might be re-thinking of the original action, deterrence, retribution, or all three.

By contrast to the Chicken War, and more recently, the enormous trade controversy over subsidies involving Boeing and Airbus, in its 14th year of WTO litigation, has not yet resulted in trade restrictions.  Management is taking place through the dispute settlement system, without a rebalancing of trade concessions through retaliation and counter-retaliation.

Second proposition: Self-restraint is the primary source of compliance with international trade rules.  Most countries generally comply with the letter of their obligations voluntarily without being compelled to do so.  They believe that international agreements should be lived up to.  Pacta sunt servanda.

As a practical matter, while you would not know it from recent headlines, most potential trade conflicts are extinguished within WTO member governments before a measure is adopted that could adversely affect the trade of another country.

Let me give you an illustration: When in the U.S. government, I chaired an interagency committee that formulated U.S. trade policy.  A new code was going to be adopted, a plurilateral agreement for government procurement.  Not all countries were joining.  A question arose with respect to the treatment of 14 small countries with which the United States had obligations under pre-existing treaties.  These fourteen countries were not planning to sign on to the new code.  Under the procurement agreement, only signatories were required to receive the benefits. The question being debated was whether the United States would honor its bilateral treaty obligations, extending the benefits of the new code to these countries and getting nothing additional in return.  All the agencies but one, the State Department in charge of foreign relations, voted to limit agreement benefits to agreement signatories.  I summed up the vote as follows: the lone voice of the State Department would prevail.  Why? To loud outcries I said simply that if the decision was referred to the President, then Jimmy Carter, he would without doubt decide that America would keep its word.

His personal honor and the honor of the country were congruent.  It was a matter of his upbringing and belief, and the national narrative.  It was not just a legal obligation, it was a moral obligation.  There would be no penalty had the opposite path been taken.  Honoring America’s commitments was simply seen as the correct thing to do.

It is worth a separate discussion whether governments, or for that matter companies, should have moral obligations.  Should governments refrain from conduct that is harmful to the environment, harmful to the economies of other countries, and harmful to the employment of other countries’ citizens?  The negotiations on fisheries subsidies would provide the subject for a debate on the moral issues involved.  The WTO is mostly about what countries commit to do for commercial reasons and not about moral obligations.  But in a number of instances the WTO agreements do support greater moral rectitude, most clearly, for example, in the government procurement agreement, which seeks to prevent corruption.

Illustrations of self-restraint also come from instances of voluntary compliance once a complaint is brought.  This occurred for example when the U.S, the EU and Japan complained that a Chinese measure discriminatorily rebating VAT to domestic semiconductor producers violated the national treatment rule – that it discriminated against imported semiconductors.  Once consultations were held, China chose to lift the measure without the need for a dispute settlement panel to be established.

In the various cases brought against U.S. attempts to deal with the distinction between the GATT rules’ treatment of rebates of direct tax and indirect taxes, once cases were filed and decisions issued, the U.S. repealed the measures, even during the period when a panel report could be blocked from adoption by the losing party.

During the WTO era, a WTO panel found against the United States, holding a safeguard action on steel inconsistent with the rules.  The George W. Bush Administration terminated the measure.

Like the Pope, the WTO and the GATT before it, has no army.  As a general rule, countries comply with adverse judgments, perhaps too often incompletely, and sometimes only after repeated WTO dispute settlement panel decisions are reached against them, but they generally do comply.  Ultimately noncompliance means being faced with authorized retaliation by the successful litigating party, but this has rarely been the path taken.

Just as most of us do not drive through red traffic lights, it is not just because there might be a penalty if one’s conduct were observed by traffic police, or pragmatically because the chances of a collision increase.  The signal is obeyed because most of us are law-abiding.  This said, when crossing the street, it is still worth checking to see whether drivers consider yielding to pedestrians in crossing zones as optional.  Similarly, self-restraint and voluntary compliance are not entirely reliable as dependable means of enforcement of trading rules.

Third proposition: That self-restraint is generally exercised does not mean that it is always exercised.Throughout history, compliance with the rule of law has been subordinated to what was at the time considered a higher imperative.  Abraham Lincoln, trained as a lawyer, understood the importance of the writ of habeas corpus, under which a person could not be held as a prisoner unless the state showed cause why he or she was being detained.  Yet Lincoln suspended that fundamental right in order to, in his view, preserve the union that was the United States.  Rules — no matter how fundamental — are from time to time breached by governments, for causes arguably necessary and otherwise.

In international economic affairs, there have been numerous examples of claimed breaches of obligations.  In 1971, the international monetary system could no longer function as it had.  The dollar was backed by and convertible to gold.  European central banks were cashing in their dollars for gold.  The U.S. was running out of gold.  The dollar was the world’s reserve currency and the U.S. did not have the freedom to change the value of the dollar, despite its balance of payments problems. America’s trading partners were opposed to seeing the dollar devalued, presumably comfortable with the disadvantage the status quo conferred on American trade.  On August 15, 1971, the U.S. imposed a 10% surcharge on imports and closed the gold window.  The import surcharge was technically inconsistent with U.S. obligations under the trading rules of the time — the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (the GATT).   As a result, the U.S. measure was condemned almost unanimously by the members of a GATT working party.  The U.S. defence was that it was justified under the rules to impose more stringent measures – quantitative restrictions.  This was not a legal defence at all.

As part of its package of measures, the U.S. made demands of its three major trading partners – the European Communities, Japan and Canada — for unilateral unreciprocated concessions.  Negotiations ensued but quickly resulted in a stalemate.

At the Smithsonian Institution in Washington on December 18, 1971, an accord was reached that allowed the U.S. dollar to be devalued.  The Smithsonian Agreement led within a relatively short time to international agreement on a floating exchange rate system.  The trade talks eventually led to the launch in September 1973 of the Tokyo Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations. The result in 1979 was the first GATT nontariff trade agreements and further trade liberalization.

I am absolutely not citing this as a precedent for any current action. I am merely observing that countries act outside the rules and sometimes there is a positive ending for all.
In short, a crisis, accompanied by unilateral U.S. action inconsistent with the trade rules of the time, led in that instance to reforms.  The crisis and how it was managed led to a better place for the world economy.  Can that happen again?  It is not to be completely excluded.  As the American humorist Mark Twain said, “History does not repeat itself, but sometimes it rhymes.”  With good will and effort, the world trading system can be updated and improved.

At present, actions are being taken and are being threatened that the press labels, with cause, “a trade war”.  Some measures are accompanied by justifications under the WTO’s rules. Others are not.  There is no authoritative interpretation at present of which are legitimate under the rules and which are not.  The role that the rules will play in resolving the ensuing conflicts is unknown.  What is clear is that at some point, with measure piled upon measure, the system itself and with it world commerce and the world economy will suffer serious harm.⁽⁴⁾

Years ago, a French diplomat said to a representative of China that China was driving on both sides of the road, meaning that it relied on both state direction and capitalism to structure its economy.  At present, there is a risk of too many major trading countries driving on both sides of the road, meaning in this case something different — acting both within and outside of what the current WTO rules may be considered to provide. Where countries engage in this conduct, each driving on both sides of the road, collisions become unavoidable.  The challenge was implicitly recognized by President Emmanuel Macron when a month ago he called on major trading countries to engage in an effort at fundamental reform of the WTO.

Fourth proposition:  A peaceful and positive global environment for world commerce can best created through multilateral agreements.

No set of unilateral actions can create a world trading system.  The same holds true for ad hoc bilateral commercial deals between governments, a plethora of bilateral agreements, or the negotiation of regional arrangements.  There is no substitute for an overarching set of rules to govern world commerce.

Some regional arrangements, however, may clearly make both economic and systemic sense.  Prime examples are the European Union, NAFTA, the Transpacific Partnership Agreement, and the intended Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.  They could be potential building blocks for wider future reforms at the multilateral level.  However, ad hoc deals and discriminatory trading arrangements should be closely scrutinized.  They may be of commercial benefit for the participants through trade diversion but do little or nothing positive for world commerce.  To gain commercial advantage through getting a better deal than other countries have was not the motivation for the creation of the carve-out for certain regional arrangements from most-favoured-nation treatment under the GATT and WTO agreements.

Most-favored nation treatment, non-discrimination, is the rock upon which the world trading system is built.

Fifth proposition.  It is in the long-term national interest of all countries – developed and developing — and collectively in the best interests of all companies and peoples — to maintain a positive global commercial environment for the sake of global and national economic well-being.  This requires investing in the system.

When I arrived in Geneva 10 months ago prepared to take up my position at the WTO, world trade was experiencing climate change – in this case I am referring to the political climate and not CO2.  Rule-making was experiencing a severe drought, while storm clouds were gathering in the form of potential trade restrictions that threatened serious damage to trading relations among the largest WTO members.  Despite all this, the December 2017 Buenos Aires Ministerial was in some respects a very substantial success.  The ground was prepared for so-called open plurilateral initiatives – for rules for e-commerce, foreign investment, domestic regulation of services, and better conditions for micro, medium and small enterprises.  Now green shoots are appearing that may portend a crop of new understandings.  It is too early to tell how these discussions will turn out, but this in my view is a very positive development.  Not all WTO members agree.  That said, the proponents of the initiatives are investing in the system.

Could more have been accomplished?  We will never know.  During the lead-up to Buenos Aires, other than the President of Argentina as host of the meeting, no head of government contacted another to urge more far-reaching outcomes, nor to my knowledge did any chief executive officer of any company contact any Member at the highest level of government for this purpose.

Underinvestment in the world trading system is not new.  Traditional trade negotiations can be viewed narrowly, as consisting solely of trading reciprocal concessions.  If country X will allow in some of country Y’s frozen chickens, Country Y may pay for that privilege by granting a reciprocal concession, for example allowing in the other’s brandy at a lower tariff.  The fact that it would be in the interest of each to autonomously lower its tariff is not a consideration for trade negotiators.  But if narrow commercial self-interest expressed in swaps of reciprocal concessions were the sole content of trade negotiations, there would not be a world trading system, just a collection of thousands of limited deals.  Some additional element must be added for creating and maintaining institutional arrangements for the good of all.  For over seventy years, there were enough parties to the WTO and the GATT to act both for narrow commercial self-interest and for self-interest more broadly defined.  They made a net contribution and in doing so invested in the multilateral trading system.  As a result, the world economy grew much faster than would otherwise have been the case and the overall level of worldwide poverty declined dramatically.

It is essential that nations again invest more in the trading system beyond seeking to advance narrow commercial self-interest.  In addition, to succeed in a multilateral setting it is imperative that participants understand the interests and concerns of others. To do this they must have open conversations with each other.  Acting on assumptions and intuition will rarely suffice.  The degree of engagement today is dangerously inadequate.

Sixth proposition.  Effective management of the international trading system and its continuing relevance require a set of three operational institutional capabilities:  rule-making (a legislative function), dispute settlement (a consultative process with resort possible to mediation and adjudication) and executive functions.  In terms relating to our topic today, this consists of making laws and assuring to the extent possible compliance with the laws. 

The daily business of the WTO is very extensive.  Members confer with each other regularly in the context of committee work.  In some areas, there is excellent transparency – draft standards are notified and commented on by other Members, for example.  Countries applying to join the WTO reform their domestic laws and regulations to qualify for membership and are peppered with numerous questions to make sure that they will contribute to the international trading system in line with their capabilities.  Dispute settlement panels meet and work to settle questions of noncompliance.  Not much of this is seen or known to those who are not directly involved.

Not all has been well, however.

• Rulemaking.

In the run-up to Buenos Aires, with the possible exception of an agreement on fish subsidies (which in the end was not concluded last year), the legislative function of the WTO ceased to function.  In recent years, at the prior two ministerial meetings, exceptions to this inertia could be pointed to – an agreement to ban agricultural export subsidies, a Trade Facilitation Agreement and expansion of the list of duty-free products covered by the Information Technology Agreement.  But expectations were low going into the Buenos Ares ministerial meeting.  Perhaps it is against that background that I regarded the ministerial meeting as very successful in that paths forward were found for exploring new areas where rules would likely be needed and could be provided.

b) Dispute settlement.

To maintain peaceful commercial relations it is essential to have an effective means to resolve disputes.  Because of recent paralysis or non-existence of the legislative function, dispute settlement by default came to play a disproportionate role in the world trading system.  This factor undoubtedly contributes to its current problems.

The news on the dispute settlement front is deeply troubling.  Unless those WTO Members accounting for a large amount of world trade believe that dispute settlement has full legitimacy, a vital part of the institution governing world trade is likely to cease to function.  Regrettably, that is a strong risk.

Comparisons with national institutions can only go so far, but there are some parallels.  Any tribunal that seeks to resolve disputes and interprets the law must take care to maintain its legitimacy.  The legitimacy of the U.S. Supreme Court has been tested in recent times in several instances.  It famously was seen as deciding a presidential election in the year 2000 (in Gore v. Bush). The Court in more recent times decided not to strike down the health care law that was the signal legislative accomplishment of the Obama Administration.  In another development, the United States Senate refused to begin consideration of the appointment of a Supreme Court nominee chosen by President Obama.  It held the seat open for a year until after Mr. Obama left office.  Despite widespread controversy over the appointment process and criticism from various parts of the political spectrum with respect to a variety of its decisions, the Court retains domestic support.  But there are perils.  In the era of the New Deal, many of Franklin Roosevelt’s key legislative achievements were struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court.  The Court came very close to being transformed.

Legitimacy is a perishable commodity.  At present the appellate function of the WTO is being threatened with extinction. The way in which the WTO was constructed, a functioning appellate function is essential to the preservation of the WTO’s dispute settlement capability.

The threat is not limited to parties being deprived of appellate review of panel rulings.  Worse, the absence of the appellate function, in the current scheme of the WTO, can prevent a final judgment being rendered based on a panel report.  There is a very dangerous scenario that follows from a loss of WTO dispute settlement.  Country A, on getting a panel decision in its favour that Country B’s actions are inconsistent with its obligations, requests that Country B bring its measure into conformity with the rules.  Country B responds that it is appealing the panel decision, knowing that there is no possibility of an appeal being heard. Country A decides to retaliate.  Country B responds with its own counter-retaliation.  All of this would seem an unlikely hypothetical were there were not already at present a high risk of cycles of retaliation and counter-retaliation outside of dispute settlement — in short, a trade war.
The U.S. is blocking appointments to the WTO Appellate Body, a right it believes it has under the consensus rules which the WTO Dispute Settlement Body uses for its proceedings.  It does this, it says, because it finds fault with the way in which the Appellate Body has acted.  While it is hoped that there is a breakthrough to a political level agreement, this has not occurred to date.

Part of this impasse has perhaps been due to other members’ reactions to the means the U.S. has chosen to demonstrate its dissent. A number of WTO members feel that hostage taking is unacceptable in these circumstances (although not by any means rare in trade negotiations.).

When there is serious controversy, it is important to understand the nature of the disagreement.  Serious differences are not unknown in United States with respect to domestic issues.  In a number of cases, they are seemingly unsolvable because of irreconcilable differences over the appropriate interpretation of the nation’s founding document.  In domestic U.S. politics, the right to life (anti-abortion) versus the freedom of choice (abortion) and the right to bear arms versus gun control are deeply divisive issues.  The domestic legal debate to a significant extent turns on the original intent of the framers (drafters) of the U.S. constitution versus how the document should be read now.

With respect to the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding and other WTO agreements, there appears to be an unbridgeable gulf among WTO Members as to how the Appellate Body should interpret its mandate.  One view is described as follows:

From the outset, the Appellate Body made the conscious choice to function as if it were a court, even if the finality of its decisions requires political approval by reverse consensus in the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB). Appellate Body members have chosen to assume their role as members of the international judiciary, performing the international judicial function in the same way as, but in a different context from, for example, judges of the International Court of Justice (ICJ). This function relates to the tasks and powers of the international judge and transcends the mere mandate and context of a particular court and tribunal as established in its constitutive document and other procedural rules. (Emphasis in bold font supplied).⁽⁵⁾

Applying this approach would necessarily give little deference to national administrative decisions, or for that matter to panels upholding national decisions.

The U.S. view, as I understand it, is that with respect to antidumping decisions, for example, the key provision is to be found in Article 17.6 (ii) of the Antidumping Agreement itself:

Where the panel finds that a relevant provision of the Agreement admits of more than one permissible interpretation, the panel shall find the authorities’ measure to be in conformity with the Agreement if it rests upon one of those permissible interpretations.⁽⁶⁾

One European commentator has concluded that:

… [I]nterpretations of Article 17.6(ii) have shown that the Appellate Body has refused to apply the principle specified therein on the ground that it is irreconcilable with the task of a judge.⁽⁷⁾

I am a former trade law practitioner, and not a WTO scholar, but I can testify from interactions over an extended period of time with a number of officials in U.S. government and with other U.S. practitioners that they share the belief that the Appellate Body has narrowed the use of trade remedies, including antidumping, in a manner that was not anticipated at the inception of WTO dispute settlement.  This is not, however, the view of many WTO Members.  The current threat to the future of the Appellate Body stems from these deeply divided views as to how the mandate of the Appellate Body has been and should be interpreted.

It had been my belief that a greater understanding shown of respective legal interpretations would have assisted in resolving the current impasse over the continued existence of the Appellate Body.  I have recently come to the conclusion that this may not be correct.  Given the prospect that the Appellate Body may soon cease to exist, other than notionally in a WTO agreement, arguing over the merits of legal positions may not contribute much at this stage.  What is needed is a good faith attempt by all parties to put into place a mutually acceptable outcome, without which an important element of the management of the world trading system will likely fall away, posing serious systemic risks.  This is a political decision that is highly unlikely to turn on legal merits.

I believe that the Appellate Body can still be saved with changes.  But a highly creative approach would be needed together with serious engagement between the United States and other members.  The outcome is unpredictable, but I feel confident that there will be an attempt at finding a resolution.  Angela Merkel, Germany’s Chancellor, is reported to have said with respect to EU eurozone reform, “If we stand still, we will be pulverized”.⁽⁸⁾  That is true, I feel, with respect to resolution of the impasse over rescuing the Appellate Body.  Standing still is not an acceptable option.

• The WTO’s executive functions.

Of the three branches of governance, the third – the executive branch of the WTO – is virtual, not actual.  In its place, Members can propose initiatives, chair committees, bring dispute settlement cases, call for consultations, and can counter-notify measures that were not well-notified or were not notified at all by another Member.  Member chairs of committees can try to prod for action.  The WTO Secretariat will prepare information and other supporting documents on request.

In the United States, whether the executive or legislative branch of government takes a lead in initiating actions varies over time.  During the Nixon presidency, John Jackson (with me in a supporting drafting position) had a major role in crafting landmark U.S. trade negotiating authority with the House of Representatives.  Succeeding him as Special Trade Representative General Counsel in the Ford Administration, I had that role working with the U.S. Senate, and then with the two Houses of Congress for final passage.  This said, we only prepared drafts.  The Executive branch proposed, the Congress was the dominant branch in determining what emerged from the process.  It was a partnership that worked.

The WTO does not have an independent mechanism for monitoring compliance and has systemic costs.  This can, for example, disadvantage small members who may feel that it would not be useful or wise to challenge the measure of a large member.  At present, no one will act on its behalf.
The European Union, the next largest geographic unit providing order for world trade, has a very active executive, the European Commission, for actions within the EU, acting under the mandate of the its Member States with oversight by the European Parliament.   The world is not a single market and will not become one.  But some aspects of the European form of organization can provide a model for a more effective WTO at some point in the future.  A consensus would be needed to strengthen the initiation and management functions within the WTO framework.

The WTO must function on the basis of transparency, or its deliberations, attempts at compliance, and its initiatives will clearly be impaired.  Having as full information as possible on what is taking place in the world of trade is imperative.  Officially, the WTO knows only what its members decide to share with it.  I once asked Arthur Dunkel when he was Director General of the WTO why he did not subscribe to the Financial Times, as then he would know what was going on the world.  He replied that he did subscribe but that the GATT’s members would not let him read it.  The Secretariat of the WTO in the future should be authorized to keep members currently informed on material facts affecting world trade, based on its independent assessment.

Seventh proposition.  Maintaining the trading system and moving it forward requires leadership. 

No doubt in reaction to the daily threats of new trade actions, and the recent decisions of various WTO Members to impose restrictions, attention is again being focussed on the adequacy of the current multilateral trading system’s rules.  As noted, President Macron at the time of the OECD Ministerial meeting at the end of May called for reform of the WTO and the WTO Director General supported the need for reform.  (The need for reform had been cited at the Buenos Aires Ministerial by the U.S. Trade Representative in his first appearance at t WTO event.  But it was not picked up by others at the time.)

A system of rules requires periodic updating to remain fully relevant.  At least a quarter century has passed since most of the current rules were negotiated.  The world economy has grown and evolved.  Trade patterns have shifted, and trade measures have changed dramatically. This is a difficult time for suggesting liberalizing trade initiatives given the rise of populism and dissatisfaction on the part of many with what they see as the imbalance of the benefits as compared with the costs of international trade.  However, the rate of change in the world economy is only going to increase.  It will take strong positive leadership on the part of many to be equal to the coming challenges.

With respect to managing trade conflicts, the best answer is not retaliation and counter-retaliation.  It is first to update and broaden the coverage of the rules of the international trading system so that measures taken are increasingly within the rules.  If the lanes on a two-lane highway cannot handle the traffic, the answer is not to drive on both sides of the road but to increase the number of lanes.  The second best but essential component of a functioning world trading system is an effective dispute settlement system.

Eighth proposition.  The future is in your hands.

The future is not written yet. You and your generation have been given the privilege and responsibility of holding the pen.⁽⁹⁾

I am optimistic that the WTO can and will be maintained and improved, although there are very likely near-term challenges that need to be met and overcome.  And perhaps some of you will take on these challenges.  The program you are graduating from examines the interconnection of law, economics, and political science.  Those are exactly the disciplines needed for attempting to manage the trading system.

When John F. Kennedy was inaugurated as the 35th President of the United States, he called Americans to public service with the words “My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.”  My generation did respond.  Many entered into public service in one form or another.

Technological change is accelerating.  My father’s generation when very young watched as horses gave way to cars and gas lighting to electricity and lived to see humans go into space and a man walk on the moon.  My generation spanned the time of the moon shot, giant container ships carrying massive cargoes, the beginnings of the internet and introduction and growth of electronic commerce.

Soon it may be that most cars and trucks will be autonomous.  National governments need to be more responsive to the adjustment needs caused technology or international trade will pay the price for dislocations in the jobs market. At the same time, we hope to take better care of the planet’s air, water and soil.  These are going to be continuing challenges and it is likely that the greatest progress will be made in your generation.

One major change that is foreseen is a time when artificial intelligence found in computers will equal and then begin to exceed human intelligence.  Technologists call this event “singularity” and estimate that it will be reached in the year 2045.  That is an interesting concept.  Had it existed now, machines could have substituted their effort for yours, for example to write a dissertation on whether the euro is really an optimal currency solution for all of its participating countries.  Of course, the paper would then be graded by employing AI as well, avoiding the need for both teaching and learning. You are fortunate as students to have preceded that revolutionary change.

There are a number of problems with AI singularity. One is illustrated by the experience of a brilliant business planning expert named Pierre Wack.  Years ago, at a conference at the Harvard Business School, I listened as he described how using decision-tree analysis – meaning choosing repeatedly which of two successive options was more likely – he predicted for his employer Shell Oil Company, the two world oil crises, one in 1973 and the second in 1979.  In the first, company management listened to him, deployed its assets in anticipation of the OPEC oil embargo, and it weathered that economic storm well.  In the second, corporate management did not believe him, and the company suffered the consequences with the rest of the industry.

Algorithms do not have a personal sense of responsibility, nor is there a societal expectation that they are to be held accountable.  AI cannot provide leadership.  Winston Churchill’s mobilization of the English language to give the British people hope in the opening phases of World War II would be highly unlikely to be substituted by a computer.  John F. Kennedy’s call to young Americans to public service would not either be well- articulated by computer nor have the desired impact.

I believe that there will be limits to the employment of AI after singularity is reached. There is a spark in humanity that is extraordinary. It is that spark of individuality that machines may emulate but can never achieve.

A very human question will be what values you bring to government, business and civil society.  These may have been instilled in you by your family and in your early schooling.

Civic responsibility was never a formal part of the curriculum during my own education. It arrived in pieces, a part of my upbringing and experience.  As one example, in the sixth grade in the U.S. system, attended by students who were 11 to 12 years old, we had to memorize the oath that Athenian youths took in ancient times:

We will ever strive for the ideals and sacred things of the city, both alone and with many; We will unceasingly seek to quicken the sense of public duty; We will revere and obey the city’s laws; We will transmit this city not only not less, but greater, better and more beautiful than it was transmitted to us.⁽¹⁰⁾

Many of you will be in leadership positions, and some in equally important supporting roles in public service or in the private sector.  Wherever you serve around the globe, your contribution to society will count. From whatever positions you accept over your careers, very often you will be in a position to help drive public policy.  To do so is both challenging and exciting.

I have seen examples of a person coming into a room and completely altering the dynamic, something others were unable to do.  When they were of high rank and had this effect, it was not by any means because of their position as minister.  Rather they were minister because of this talent.  Individuals are remarkable.  They can change the course of history.

Much in the world of trade will change going forward, largely due to technology.  Trade will move in different channels and consist of different products –, in terms of goods, services and products of the mind.  Human ingenuity and talent, and a moral center, will determine the success of the human race.

One of the most positive aspects of my job is to oversee the WTO staff working with the trade negotiators of countries seeking entry into the WTO.  Many of these countries are fragile, conflict-affected economies, ravaged by recent or current wars and by disease. They seek to join the World Trade Organization to raise the living standards of their people and put them in a better position to attain peace.  That is what the multilateral trading system was designed to do, increase the rate of growth to lift all out of want and to give the world a better chance at peace.  At this it has been remarkably successful.  This was the vision of the leaders that created the multilateral trade and financial institutions after two world wars during the 20th century.  I have no doubt that there are many among you who can and will carry that vision forward.

Right now, WTO reform is being contemplated, spurred by visions of a trade Armageddon.  This may lead to WTO 2.0, in which a number of important but a limited number of perceived deficiencies in the current WTO rules and institutions may be rectified – for example, competition among differing national policies regarding state investment, treatment of intellectual property, curbs on harmful domestic subsidies, the bounds of retaliatory measures, changes in dispute settlement arrangements, treatment of developing countries, transparency and institutional arrangements.

In your generation’s hands will be the creation of WTO 3.0.  It could be revolutionary, improving the way humanity regards the role of trade and the rules which govern it, as revolutionary as was the thinking of Hugo Grotius.  In 1609, in his treatise Mare Liberum (or The Freedom of the Seas), Grotius held that the “most specific and unimpeachable axiom of the Law of Nations, called a primary rule or first principle, the spirit of which is self-evident and immutable” is that “every nation is free to travel to every other nation, and to trade with it.”

What might be considered for inclusion in WTO 3.0: that membership in the system is universal; that the default condition of national borders and domestic economies is openness and closing a border or impeding foreign economic participation would require a strong justification; that there is a duty to provide fairness not just among nations but within them; that the disadvantaged will be raised up; that the land, air and waters of the planet will be treated as an inheritance to be passed on, in line with the Athenian oath, in a better condition than that in which it was received; and that the rule of law, by consent of the systems’ members, will continually be improved, and will be adhered to.

You can consider making this a conscious lifetime effort.  Chancellor Angela Merkel recently quoted Immanuel Kant as follows: He who has no goals must endure his fate; he who has a purpose can shape it.

Individually and collectively you have the capability to make a positive contribution.

Each of you can and should make a difference.

Notes

1. A caveat, I speak here in my personal capacity, not on behalf of the WTO or its members
2. In response to the invitation from Professor Peter Van Den Bosch, when I chose the topic “The Rule of Law in an Age of Conflict”, I said that my remarks would not attempt to rival his erudition as a jurist and scholar.   Rather they would be based on my experience as a trade negotiator for the U.S. government and for private parties as a trade law practitioner, and now as a Deputy Director General of the WTO.  I said that the point of view would be policy-oriented, focusing on international commercial relations.
3. Paul Romer, Stanford economist.
4. The weaponization of trade: Beyond the scope of these remarks is an entire category of trade measures imposed for reasons of foreign policy or national security.  In 1808, Thomas Jefferson imposed a complete embargo on U.S. foreign trade in order to coerce the British and French to make peace with each other and stop interfering with U.S. shipping.  It was in effect for just over a year and was disastrous for U.S. commerce. Douglas Irwin in his book “Clashing Over Commerce” recounts that Alexander Hamilton had earlier warned against an embargo against Britain: “The consequences of so great and so sudden a disturbance of our Trade which must affect our exports as wells as our Imports are not to be calculated. An excessive rise in the price of foreign commodities – a proportional decrease of price and demand for our own commodities – the derangement of our revenue and credit – these circumstances united may occasion the most dangerous dissatisfaction & disorders in the community and may drive the government to a disgraceful retreat – independent of foreign causes.” – During the Vietnam War, the U.S. Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control applying WWI-era authority banned financial transactions with those spending funds in Vietnam, including the Quakers who would travel to that country to film the effects of the conflict. — In January 1980, Jimmy Carter imposed a grain export embargo in response to Russia’s invasion of Afghanistan. – In 1996, the Congress enacted the Helms-Burton Act which extended a U.S. embargo against Cuba to any non-U.S. company that dealt economically with Cuba. After blocking statutes were enacted by the EU and Canada, and a WTO case was filed, negotiations resolved the issue and the WTO case was discontinued. – Echoes of these earlier instances of the application of trade and financial sanctions can be found in current events. (e.g. Iran sanctions effects on non-U.S. companies, ZTE, Rusal).  Not all of the current issues will necessarily be subject to WTO dispute settlement.  In addition, there is no settled WTO jurisprudence on the use of economic sanctions. Currently applied sanctions may soon be tested under the WTO dispute settlement system.  That will be new.
5. Treaty Interpretation by the WTO Appellate Body. Isabelle Van Damme,  EJIL (2010), Vol. 21 No. 3, 605–648 doi: 10.1093/ejil/chq049. Downloaded from ejil.oxfordjournals.org at New York University on November 2, 2010.  606 EJIL 21 (2010), 605–648.
6. Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994, At. 17.6 (ii).
7. Ibid n. 5 at p. 607.
8. Financial Times, in an article by Isabelle Mateos y Lago, in the Thursday 28 June 2018 print edition.  In the same article, the author, again addressing the eurozone, states that “Mr. Macron’s insight that deep changes are needed to prevent implosion was correct … .”  And further “Europe [here substitute “the WTO Members”] does not have the luxury of standing still until the mood of its citizens [here substitute “the WTO Members”] improves.”
9. The first part of this is a quotation from the movie Back to the Future, from a character called “Doc.”  The second part is from a message from a Geneva public service organization.
10. To be found in the foyer of the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs,Syracuse, New York.

Source:wto.org

 

139/ Powerful new weapon in the fight against climate change

Rising earth temperatures are causing chaos and we need to act now. A new International Standard helps governments and industry take action towards reducing the damage.

Increasing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, largely as a result of burning fossil fuels, is heating up the planet and bringing with it catastrophic weather, disruptions to food production and other societal stresses. And it is mostly caused by us. According to the United Nations¹⁾, as the world’s population and standards of living grow, so too do the carbon and other emissions we release into the atmosphere.

A key goal²⁾ of the United Nations (UN) 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, then, states that taking action to combat this phenomenon is essential, and it must be taken now. The newly published ISO 14080, Greenhouse gas management and related activities – Framework and principles for methodologies on climate actions, directly supports the Paris Agreement to limit global warming to below 2 °C and the UN Sustainable Development Goals by helping governments and businesses around the world do just that.

The standard provides a common framework for local and national governments to take appropriate actions for the mitigation and adaptation to climate change and helps them develop consistent, compatible and comparable policies and measures. It is also useful in assessing the effectiveness of these actions. What’s more, it can be used by the private sector to identify potential and justifiable actions they can take, and by financial institutions to determine the impact of their investments.

Yustinus Kristianto Widiwardono, the Convenor of the working group that developed ISO 14080, said the standard will not only help organizations when it comes to measurement and reporting, it will also reduce risks and increase opportunities related to actions taken together with other organizations or governments due to its compatibility and transparency.

“ISO 14080 promotes setting ambitious long-term goals and targets for emissions reduction per industry sector,” he said.

“It also directly supports the Paris Agreement, in particular Article 6³⁾  which states that the Parties should promote and facilitate the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions.”

ISO 14080 was developed by working group WG 7 of ISO technical committee ISO/TC 207, Environmental management, subcommittee SC 7, Greenhouse gas management and related activities. Its secretariat is held jointly by SAC, ISO’s member for China, and SCC, ISO’s member for Canada. It is available from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

Source:iso.org

 

140/ C40 promises to help Hanoi combat climate change

With abundant financial resources, the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group (C40) could help Hanoi with climate change response, said C40 Executive Director Mark Watts.

At a meeting with Vice Chairman of the Hanoi People’s Committee Nguyen The Hung on June 28, Mark Watts urged Hanoi leaders to share the city’s plan on climate change combat so that C40 can help the capital fulfil this goal.

He also pledged to provide support for C40 member cities in environmental protection as they committed.

During the working session, C40 representatives suggested enhancing cooperation and use of renewable energies in Vietnam and Hanoi in particular.

For his part, Hung said Hanoi will make a list of specific items to get assistance from C40 in climate change response.

Hanoi has invested in urban development in tandem with sustainably environmental protection, he said, adding that the city has focused on handling water and air pollution, plastic waste, exhaust fumes and dust.

At the same time, the city is seeking ways to use renewable energies in order to reduce gas emissions, the official said.

Working across multiple sectors and issues, C40 convenes networks that provide a range of services in support of cities’ climate change efforts. C40 currently has 17 networks that cover the mitigation, adaptation and sustainability topics of highest priority to C40 cities and with the potential for the greatest climate impact. C40 networks help cities replicate, improve and accelerate climate action.

Source: VNA

141/ Canada, Japan Move Closer to CPTPP Ratification, Malaysia Calls for Trade Deal Review

Legislation to ratify the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) is making its way through both the Canadian and Japanese legislatures, officials say, bringing the deal closer to entering into force.

Earlier this month, Canadian international trade minister François-Philippe Champagne pledged that his government would work “expeditiously” to advance the ratification process, though the final passage of the legislation may not take place before autumn, according to comments reported in Canadian newspaper iPolitics.

The 11 signatories of the CPTPP include Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam. They signed the deal in March during a ceremony in Chile. (See Bridges Weekly, 15 March 2018)

The agreement will enter into force 60 days after at least six of the signatory countries complete their respective ratification procedures, or if half of the signatories do so.

Testifying before the House of Commons trade committee, Champagne told fellow parliamentarians that Ottawa wants to be in the “first wave” of signatories to ratify the deal.

“The momentum of our progressive trade agenda continues with this next important step on CPTPP. We negotiated the best deal for Canadians from coast to coast to coast, and this Agreement will benefit industries across Canada – from beef and barley to forestry products, seafood, manufacturing, and services,” said Champagne.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau wrote on Twitter that the accord provides significant economic gains over the coming years that would be a benefit to Canadian workers, consumers, and companies alike. “Trade deals – like the CPTPP – open up new markets around the world for Canadian businesses, and will create good middle class jobs,” the tweet said.

Canadian agricultural exporters have been pressuring lawmakers to accelerate the ratification. In a letter to Champagne, the Canadian Agri-Food Trade Alliance warned that “the race is on as other CPTPP members are moving quickly to ratify the agreement.”

“If we don’t act to implement the CPTPP as soon as possible, Canada will lose the ‘first mover advantage’ and see our competitors benefit from tariff cuts while we are taxed at a higher rate,” the letter says.

Mexico was the first country to ratify the multi-country trade deal in April. Australia tabled the treaty in Parliament earlier this year, where it is undergoing consideration by the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties (JSCOT), and has been a vocal proponent of the accord. Chile is also expected to ratify in the near term, according to the letter from the Canadian farm association. The same coalition indicated the several others could follow suit over the summer months, naming among these New Zealand, Singapore, Peru, Vietnam, and Brunei.

The lower house of the Japanese Diet, the country’s legislature, has already endorsed the bill, which is expected to be fully ratified by the end of this month. Japan still has to enact a separate bill to implement domestic measures related to the agreement, such as support for livestock farmers, who will be facing greater competition from abroad.

The original Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) accord was signed by 12 countries in February 2016, but US President Donald Trump withdrew his country from the deal shortly after his inauguration in January 2017. The withdrawal prompted renewed negotiations among the remaining 11 members, who ultimately agreed in January to suspend a couple dozen provisions of the original accord. (See Bridges Weekly 25 January 2018)

The CPTPP incorporates the original TPP agreement, pledging to slash tariffs on 95 percent of trade in goods, along with covering a host of trade topics, ranging from technical barriers to trade and sanitary and phytosanitary measures to competition policy and intellectual property rights.

The renewed deal suspends a number of the TPP’s original provisions, especially from the chapter on intellectual property rights. A few other provisions were suspended in chapters such as environment, investment, and public procurement.

Malaysia’s pledge for a review

As Canada and Japan move forward with ratification, Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad said in a recent interview with the Nikkei Asian Review on the sidelines of a Tokyo conference that his new government would be studying the agreements signed under his predecessor, and may potentially seek changes.

The deals under scrutiny involve trade accords, including the CPTPP, as well as agreements covering various other policy areas.

“This government must review all agreements entered into by the previous government. We will honour treaties made in the past, but when there is a need for reconsideration, we will appeal to our partners to give us a chance to take into consideration the situation we are in,” Mahathir said.

“We want to rectify [the accord], but we want to modify the agreement in such a way that there is fair competition between the members of the TPP,” he added.

Mahathir said during his Tokyo visit that smaller developing nations need trade rules that are better crafted to suit their specific needs, particularly relative to large advanced or emerging economies. “Small countries cannot compete on the same terms as bigger countries,” he said, according to comments reported by Reuters.

“We are not completely against the TPP but it needs to be re-negotiated, so that smaller countries would have the chance to compete because they would be given certain handicaps,” he added. He did not specify which of the CPTPP’s provisions were problematic in his view.

Should Malaysia withdraw from the CPTPP, it will not affect the accord’s prospects for entering into force. As noted above, the CPTPP’s revised terms state that the deal will still take effect once six signatories, or at least half of whichever signatories remain, ratify the accord. The CPTPP text specifies that whichever threshold is smaller will apply.

Colombia interested in signing on

Meanwhile, New Zealand’s Trade and Export Minister David Parker and Mexican Economy Secretary Ildefonso Guajardo both confirmed to reporters that Colombia has expressed its plans to request entry into the CPTPP after the deal enters into force.

Parker confirmed the Colombian request, saying that he will support “the importance of defending and promoting a trading system based on rules, and the importance of regional agreements like CPTPP being open to those willing to join.”

“Colombia is the first to formally notify New Zealand, as depositary, of its interest in joining once CPTPP enters into force,” he added.

New Zealand is the depositary of the deal, which among other roles involves publishing the CPTPP text, accepting documents such as any negotiated amendments or requests for accession, and taking in submissions from signatories of their ratification instruments.

Guajardo said earlier this month during a meeting of Pacific Alliance ministers that the participation of Colombia, a member of the Pacific Alliance, would help bridge the two trade blocs, given their overlapping membership. Pacific Alliance, a four-member Latin American trade pact, also includes Chile, Mexico, and Peru, all CPTPP members.

The group is also negotiating with four countries – Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and Singapore – in order to bring them on board as associate members. Those four countries are also CPTPP members.

On a separate note, the American Chamber of Commerce in Singapore (AmCham), a regional version of the major US business federation, has publicly called on the US government to join CPTPP. AmCham Singapore chairman Dwight Hutchins said that the CPTPP is “the best and most strategic trade framework from a business perspective and the US needs to be a member for American businesses in Singapore, across the region and at home to remain at the forefront of 21st century trade.”

Source: ICTSD

 

Tin tiếng Anh trên tbt-mocst.vn

từ tháng 5-8/2018 (Phạm Thị Băng Tâm)

 

Tin bài 01/7

 

142/ Vietnam, RoK intensify IT cooperation

The Vietnam Internet Association has signed a cooperation agreement with the Korea Federation of ICT Organisations, aiming to develop bilateral relations and create a forum for businesses of Vietnam and the Republic of Korea (RoK) to transfer technologies, services and industries relating to ICT.

Accordingly, the two sides will exchange market information, support Vietnamese and RoK companies to participate in trade fairs, and organise workshops and training courses on ICT.

The RoK is pursuing the I-Korea 4.0 policy, which, the Presidential Committee on the Fourth Industrial Revolution said, will secure a new growth engine for the country by expanding industries’ productiveness and competitiveness under the idea of “intelligence, innovation, inclusiveness, and interaction,” according to the Yonhap News Agency.

Vietnam is the RoK’s third largest trade partner. Of note, the bilateral cooperation in the IT sector is thriving.

Vietnam has more than 58 million internet users out of its 90 million people and over 125 million mobile subscribers.

Source: VNA

 

Tin bài 02/7

143/ Russia initiates WTO dispute complaint against US steel, aluminium duties

The Russian Federation has requested WTO dispute consultations with the United States regarding US duties on certain imported steel and aluminium products. The request was circulated to WTO members on 2 July.

Russia claims the US duties of 25% and 10% on imports of steel and aluminium products respectively are inconsistent with provisions of the WTO’s General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 and the Agreement on Safeguards.

Further information is available in document WT/DS554/1.

What is a request for consultations?

The request for consultations formally initiates a dispute in the WTO. Consultations give the parties an opportunity to discuss the matter and to find a satisfactory solution without proceeding further with litigation. After 60 days, if consultations have failed to resolve the dispute, the complainant may request adjudication by a panel.

• More on consultations
• Current status of disputes

Source:wto.org

 

144/ RCEP meeting in Tokyo: 16 Asian countries agree to reach basic consensus on regional trade pact by end of 2018

Trade ministers and officials from 16 Asian countries have agreed to speed up negotiations on outstanding issues and reach a basic agreement on a regional trade pact by the end of 2018.

During weekend meetings, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe urged fellow leaders to work for an early conclusion of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) in the face of an increasingly protectionist US. Japan has sought to take leadership in shaping the pact as an alternative to a Pacific Rim free-trade grouping that Trump abandoned early in 2018, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

At a joint news conference on Sunday after the talks, Japanese Economy, Trade and Industry Minister Hiroshige Seko and his Singaporean counterpart, Chan Chun Sing, noted there are differences that still need to be resolved, but the participants see reaching an accord as evidence of Asia’s commitment to defending free trade.

“This is indeed a moment for us to seize the opportunity against a global backdrop where we are facing headwinds in the trade relationships and the trade regimes,” Chan said. Achieving a pact would be a powerful statement to show what RCEP countries stand for, he said.

In a joint statement, the ministers said achieving a pact is important especially “in view of the current global trade environment, which faces serious risks from unilateral trade actions and reactions, as well as their debilitating implications on the multilateral trading system.” They also pledged to seek breakthroughs in politically challenging areas.

In his remarks earlier on Monday, Abe said a pact among the countries that together make up half the global population has enormous growth potential.

“As we are faced with concerns of the rise of protectionism in the world, all of us in Asia must unite, and our future depends on whether we can keep hoisting our flagship principle of free and fair trade,” Abe told the meeting in Tokyo.

“Let us be as one and achieve a free, fair and rules-based market in this region.” Trump, who says he prefers bilateral deals, has pulled the US out of the TPP, leaving the remaining 11 countries, from Chile to New Zealand, to work on a revamped version of that pact. Japan is a leading participant in those talks, too.

Trump has imposed high tariffs on steel and aluminum imports and has threatened to add automobiles to reduce America’s trade deficit. He has singled out Chinese products, prompting fears of a trade war.

Already hit by increased US steel and aluminum tariffs, Japan has told the World Trade Organisation that it may retaliate against US goods totaling about 50 billion yen ($450 million).
Tokyo warned the US Department of Commerce on Friday that a higher US tariff on auto imports could backfire, jeopardizing hundreds of thousands of American jobs created by Japanese automobile industry-related companies, raising prices for US consumers and causing a disaster for the US and global economy.

Trump’s moves have resonated in Asia, where many countries have prospered thanks to free trade and the expansion of global supply chains.

Members of the initiative, launched in 2013, have struggled with issues including tariffs, trade in services and investment rules, as well as protection for intellectual property rights. Japan is also cautious about China’s influence. China, which is not part of the TPP, plays a key role in RCEP.

RCEP also includes Southeast Asia, Australia, New Zealand, India and South Korea.

Source: First Post

 

Tin bài 03/7

145/ Support remains solid for Aid for Trade financing, WTO members told

Support for projects intended to help poor countries expand their participation in global trade continues to be solid, with low income countries garnering the most support on a per-capita basis, WTO members were told on 3 July. The latest update was delivered to the Committee on Trade and Development’s session on Aid for Trade.

Frans Lammersen, Principal Administrator for the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development’s Co-operation Directorate, said that USD 342 billion in aid for trade support has been disbursed since the start of the initiative in 2006. Sectors receiving the most support were transport and storage (USD 95 billion), energy generation and supply (USD 75 billion) and agriculture, fisheries and forestry (USD 71 billion).

Aggregate aid commitments reached a peak of around USD 55 billion in 2015 before slipping slightly to USD 51 billion in 2016. This was still well above the long term average, with support for trade-related infrastructure and productive capacity registering strong growth since the early 2000s, Mr Lammersen noted.

In absolute terms Asia and Africa are the largest aid for trade recipients. Most of this support took the form of loans rather than grants.  Mr Lammersen noted that overall, most financing for development is increasingly through private market finance, with upper middle income countries the biggest recipients.

Low income and lower middle income countries were the biggest aid for trade recipients on a per-capita basis, Mr Lammersen said. However, support for least developed countries is increasingly taking the form of loans rather than grants. This has raised concerns about debt sustainability for recipients.

In regards to official development assistance (ODA), the share of aid for trade in sector allocable ODA continues to steadily increase and now accounts for nearly 40 per cent of the total, Mr Lammersen added. His presentation is available here.

The WTO-led Aid for Trade initiative encourages developing country governments and donors to recognize the role that trade can play in development. In particular, the initiative seeks to mobilize resources to address the trade-related constraints identified by developing and least-developed countries.

The chair of the Committee on Trade and Development, Ambassador Diego Aulestia of Ecuador, noted that the theme of the current Aid for Trade work programme is “Supporting Economic Diversification and Empowerment for Inclusive, Sustainable Development through Aid for Trade”. WTO members have a substantive and detailed set of activities and outcomes to deliver, including the organization of workshops, delivering the next Global Review of Aid for Trade in mid-2019, and conducting a review of Aid-for-Trade achievements.

South Africa, speaking for the African Group of WTO members, said the group was pleased members succeeded in improving the work programme, which will reflect as much as possible the priorities and constraints of developing members, in particular least developed countries. The group also stressed the importance of the regional dimension of the planned work.

Multilateral development banks, namely the Asian Development Bank, the Islamic Development Bank, and the World Bank, updated the meeting on their on-going support related to trade. Presentations were also made by United Nations Industrial Development Organization the Enhanced Integrated Framework, and the International Trade Centre on their aid for trade-related activities, while the WTO Secretariat reported on the activities of the Standards and Trade Development Facility.

Source:wto.org

 

146/ Members raise concerns over US Section 232 investigation on automobiles and automotive parts

Members expressed their concerns over possible measures by the United States regarding extra duties on the import of automobiles, including cars, SUVs, vans, light trucks and automotive parts, at the Council for Trade in Goods (CTG) held on 3 and 4 of July. Over 40 members — including the 28 European Union members — took the floor to warn of the “serious disruption” to world markets and the multilateral trading system that may arise as a result of these potential measures, particularly in light of the large proportion of global trade accounted for by these products.

The item was discussed at the request of Japan and the Russian Federation, which were of the view that such measures could trigger a spiral of counter-measures and result in serious disruption to the rules-based multilateral trading system. They recalled that the issue of US investigations under Section 232 provisions has been raised over the past year in several WTO bodies – the CTG and the Committee on Safeguards – only to see things change for the worse. Both Japan and Russia reserved their right to protect their legitimate rights and interests as provided for under WTO rules.

The European Union echoed these concerns and said that there can be no justification for measures to restrict imports of cars, car parts and light trucks on grounds of national security, as there is no apparent economic threat to a US industry which has steadily expanded domestic production over the last 10 years. Any trade restrictive measures in the sector will have a serious negative impact not only on the EU but on the global economy overall, the EU said.

China stressed that the measures at stake mostly involve products for civilian use and that, as such, they do not pose a threat to national security. According to Beijing, these are simply protectionist measures that will significantly distort trade and global value chains and will bring serious challenges to the multilateral trading system. China said it stands ready to work with all WTO members to tackle this challenge and to take concrete action in order to safeguard the authority of the WTO and fight against unilateralism and protectionism.

Other members – Canada, Switzerland, Norway, Turkey, Costa Rica, Hong Kong China, Venezuela, Singapore, Brazil, Korea, Mexico, Qatar, Thailand and India – also raised concerns with the  announced US investigation, which in their view will trigger a cycle of measures and counter-measures that will harm all members with negative effects on international trade.

On the impact of the existing US tariffs on steel and aluminium, some members pointed out that the additional tariffs in force since 23 March are already having negative effects on the supply chains, on producers and exporters, on the US downstream industry, and finally on US consumers. It was recognized that there is a serious problem of global overcapacity in the steel and aluminium sectors, but these members noted that import duties at the border will not solve it – it needs to be addressed through dialogue and negotiations in international fora such as the OECD.

In response, the United States said that the US Section 232 investigation on steel and aluminium is an issue that has been referred to the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) and, therefore, should not belong to the CTG agenda. The US referred other members to the statements made on this issue in the Safeguards Committee, as well as the Dispute Settlement Body, for further information on the US position on this issue.

Specific trade concerns

• Uruguay, the United States, Argentina and New Zealand expressed concerns regarding the European Union’s decision to register the term “Danbo” as a Protected Geographical Indication (GI) and the application under consideration to protect the term “Havarti”. These members consider these as generic terms and, as such, they cannot be subject to GI protection. Since 1996 Danbo and Havarti, like many other types of cheese, have a specific Codex Standard, which regulates its protection and labelling worldwide. The EU reiterated its position first expressed at the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee that any issues strictly concerning intellectual property (IP) rights should be discussed in the appropriate fora, notably the TRIPS Council.
• The European Union, Switzerland and the US complained about the implementation by the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries of a 100% ad valorem excise duty on energy drinks and a 50% ad valorem duty on other carbonated drinks. They said that there is no rationale for applying duties on these products, and no indication that the measures would be modified to make them consistent with the WTO. GCC countries, particularly Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, were asked to explain the rationale for targeting only carbonated soft drinks, with and without sugar, as well as energy drinks and why an ad valorem excise tax was applied instead of a tax-based on the volume or quantity of the relevant ingredients. On behalf of the three GCC members, Saudi Arabia said that the tax aims to protect human health and the environment, and is not intended to protect the local industry.
• The Dominican Republic and the United States voiced concerns with the decision by Haiti to modify tariff concessions and apply tariffs higher than the bound levels in its WTO schedule of commitments. The move followed Haiti’s accession to the Caribbean Community (CARICOM). Additionally, the Dominican Republic said that Haiti has not notified the WTO the decision to impose a ban on the importation of 23 products, mainly food and construction products. As a result, the Dominican Republic said that since October 2015 global exports to Haiti have decreased by 43%. Haiti acknowledged the problem and said that discussions continue on harmonizing its custom tariff regime in order to fully engage in intra-CARICOM trade while ensuring that its schedule of concessions is in full conformity with WTO rules.
• Australia, Thailand, Guatemala, Brazil and Canada asked Pakistan to confirm if, as stated at the last Committee on Agriculture meeting in June this year, it has effectively put an end to the 1.5 million metric ton sugar freight import subsidy announced in 2017. Pakistan responded that the measure has expired and that it will engage with all the delegations concerned to further clarify this issue.
• On a related matter, these same members, plus the European Union, raised concerns about the WTO consistency of the measures relating to sugar exports announced by India last February. They said India has not responded substantively to questions in various WTO committees regarding sugar overproduction and substantial new financial support announced on June 6. India said that the measure aims to alleviate the suffering of small and marginal sugar farmers and that a more specific response to issues like the administrative implementation of this measure will be provided to the Committee of Agriculture in due course.
• Australia, Canada, the United States, New Zealand, Singapore and the Russian Federation raised issue with the lack of clarity in the responses provided by India regarding its quantitative restrictions (QRs) on imports of certain pulses imposed in 2017 and 2018. In addition, these members asked for clarification regarding India´s quantitative restriction on peas announced last April and which was extended until 30 September 2018. India, the world’s largest producer and consumer of pulses, responded that these measures are temporary and were already notified to the Committees on Import Licensing and Market Access. It added that the decision to impose a quota was based on the domestic demand and supply situation and aimed at alleviating the distress caused to small an marginal farmers by the influx of cheap imports into the country.
• The European Union reiterated concerns regarding various trade restrictive practices imposed by the Russian Federation: cement certification requirements, “good manufacturing practice” certificates for pharmaceutical products, export bans on skins and hides, import duties on a series of tariff lines, an embargo on fishery products from Estonia and Latvia, the wine taxation regime and the new regime applied to the automotive sector as of 1 July 2018. These concerns were echoed by the United States. In response, the Russian Federation said that while it is in full compliance with international and WTO standards it is aware of the concerns expressed by some members and is ready to engage with them with a view to address all the issues raised.
• China took issue on a proposed rule by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) of the United States intended to prohibit the use of federal funds to purchase equipment or services from any communications providers identified as posing a national security risk to domestic networks or the communications supply chain. China also raised concerns by the US’ recently launched series of national security measures and expressed its doubts about their consistency with WTO rules, particularly with regards transparency and compliance with the most-favoured nation (MFM) principle. The United States said that such a rule would fall squarely with the WTO exception for national security and that the proposed rule-making had been conducted through a transparent and open process. The FCC is an independent regulator and, as such, members should refer to it for further updates on this matter, the US added.

Other trade concerns

Members took up a total of 24 trade concerns (eight of them new). Trade concerns previously brought up in the Goods Council included the African Union’s levy on imports to fund peace support operations, Jordan’s export subsidy replacement program, Indonesia’s restrictions on imports and exports, United States’ measures on imported seafood, India’s customs duties on ICT products, Mongolia’s QRs and prohibitions on certain agricultural products, and Egypt’s manufacturer registration system

The Goods Council also heard previously raised concerns regarding Vietnam’s decree on the regulation of conditions for automobiles manufacturing, assembling, importing, and automotive warranty and maintenance services; China’s restrictive measures on the import of scrap materials; China’s customs duties on certain integrated circuits; US’ measures on aviation security equipment; and the EU’s treatment of biofuels and bio-liquids derived from palm oil as spelled out in the amendment of the Renewable Energy Directive (RED) currently being discussed in Brussels.

Workshop on e-commerce

Members agreed to continue consultations to try and convene this year a “Workshop on cross-border e-commerce and trade in goods” under the aegis of the Council for Trade in Goods. The CTG chair, Ambassador Stephen de Boer of Canada, stressed that from the informal consultations held in past months with members, there appeared to be general support for such a workshop.

Some members said that the content of the workshop should be clearly defined so as to avoid duplication with other e-commerce events and suggested that a potential draft agenda should be streamlined and reduced to a one-day event.

Other members underlined the value of a multilateral discussion on this issue and said that information and experience sharing on cross-border e-commerce should be enhanced. They said that while it should be a WTO event, it should nevertheless afford members an opportunity to get a sense of the work being by other international organizations, such as the World Customs Organization (WCO), the Universal Portal Union (UPU), the OECD, UNCTAD, etc.

Enlargement of the European Union

The European Union informed the Council for Trade in Goods that the negotiations following its 2013 enlargement (accession of Croatia) have been finalized. After the entry into force and implementation of the agreements reached with China, Uruguay and Brazil, the EU representative said that the last agreement with New Zealand (signed in March 2018) is about to be ratified by the European Parliament and adopted by the EU Council, which will lead to its entry into force and implementation. Once the Council has adopted it, the EU will submit an addendum to its notification of 29 September 2017 and the corresponding report on negotiations.

Kimberley process

The European Union, Australia, Cambodia, Canada, Guyana, Japan, Malaysia, Mauritius, Norway, the Russian Federation, South Africa, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine and the United States requested a six-year extension of the WTO waiver to the Kimberley Certification Scheme for Rough Diamonds, which is set to expire at the end of the year. They said that extending the waiver until 31 December 2024 would give legal certainty to trade measures under the Kimberley Process aimed at breaking the link between armed conflict, illicit trade and rough diamonds. Members agreed to forward the waiver decision to the next General Council for adoption.

Next meeting

The next CTG meeting is scheduled to take place on 12 and 13 November.

Source:wto.org

 

147/ Auditing standard for management system standards now updated

Management systems help organizations achieve their objectives, and auditing them makes good business sense. The International Standard for auditing management systems has just been updated, giving more guidance than ever before.

Management system standards are growing in popularity as organizations see how they can be applied to manage interrelated processes to achieve their objectives. From quality or energy management to food or traffic safety, the list of standards aimed at helping organizations put in place effective management systems is getting long.

ISO alone has over 70 management system standards, building on international expertise and best practice to help organizations perform better, save money and develop a competitive edge.

In order to get the best out of a management system and ensure continuous improvement, regular auditing needs to take place. Not an easy task if, like most organizations, you have several management systems in place.

ISO 19011, Guidelines for auditing management systems, however, offers a uniform, harmonized approach, enabling effective auditing across multiple systems at the same time.

Denise Robitaille, Chair of the ISO project committee¹⁾ that revised the standard, said it was updated to ensure it continues providing effective guidance to address changes in the marketplace, evolving technologies and the many new management system standards recently published or revised.

“Other key changes in the 2018 version include the addition of a risk-based approach to the principles of auditing to reflect the enhanced focus on risk in both management standards and in the marketplace,” she said.

“There are tips on auditing risks and opportunities as well as information on applying risk-based thinking to the audit process.

“In addition, guidance has been expanded in a number of areas such as managing an audit programme and conducting an audit.”

ISO 19011 is available from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

1) ISO 19011 was developed by ISO project committee ISO/PC 302, Guidelines for auditing management systems, whose secretariat is held by ANSI, ISO’s member for the USA.

Source:iso.org

 

Tin bài 04/7

148/ Rate of new trade restrictions from G20 economies doubles against previous period

The WTO’s nineteenth monitoring report on Group of 20 (G20) trade measures covering the period from mid-October 2017 to mid-May 2018, issued on 4 July, shows that new trade-restrictive measures from G20 economies have doubled compared to the previous review period. The report also shows that G20 economies continue to implement trade-facilitating measures, with the rate increasing slightly. The report’s findings should be of ‘real concern’ to the international community, according to Director-General Roberto Azevêdo.

A total of 39 new trade-restrictive measures were applied by G20 economies during the review period, including tariff increases, stricter customs procedures, imposition of taxes and export duties. This equates to an average of almost six restrictive measures per month, which is significantly higher than the three measures recorded during the previous review period (see chart).

G20 economies also implemented 47 measures aimed at facilitating trade during the review period, including eliminated or reduced tariffs, simplified import and export customs procedures and reduction of import taxes. At an average of almost seven trade-facilitating measures per month (see chart), this is marginally higher than the six measures recorded in the previous reporting period (mid-May to mid-October 2017).

It is notable that the estimated trade coverage of trade-facilitating measures implemented by G20 economies (US$82.7 billion) exceeded the estimated trade coverage of import-restrictive measures (US$74.1 billion), but is approximately half the trade coverage reported for these measures during the same period in 2016-17. The trade coverage of import-restrictive measures is more than one-and-a-half times larger than that during the same period in 2016-17.

Commenting on the report, Director-General Roberto Azevêdo said:

“The marked increase in new trade restrictive measures among G20 economies should be of real concern to the international community. Additional trade-restrictive measures have been announced in the weeks since this reporting period and therefore the deterioration in trade relations may be even worse than that recorded here. This continued escalation poses a serious threat to growth and recovery in all countries, and we are beginning to see this reflected in some forward-looking indicators. I urge G20 leaders to show restraint in applying new measures and to urgently de-escalate the situation. I will continue working with the G20 governments and all WTO members to this end.”

On trade remedy measures and compared to the previous period, the review period saw a slight increase in initiations of investigations by G20 economies and a significant increase of terminations of trade remedy actions (see chart). Initiations of trade remedy investigations represented about half (49%) of trade measures recorded, with anti-dumping (AD) investigations accounting for almost 80% of all trade remedy initiations. The amount of trade covered by these is estimated at US$52.3 billion and is significantly higher than in the two previous G20 reports (see chart). The trade coverage of trade remedy terminations recorded in the review period is estimated at US$6.2 billion. These measures are not classified as either trade-restrictive or trade-facilitating by this report.

The main sectors affected by trade remedy initiations during the review period were iron and steel, plastics and articles thereof, vehicles, parts and accessories thereof and products of iron and steel.

The G20 economies are Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Republic of Korea, Japan, Mexico, the Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States, as well as the European Union.

Key Findings

• This Report covers new trade and trade-related measures implemented by G20 economies between 16 October 2017 and 15 May 2018. It reveals a number of important trends in global trade policy-making. While G20 economies continue to implement trade-facilitating measures, the more worrying trend during this period is the increase in trade-restrictive measures which has come at a time of increasing trade tensions and associated rhetoric. This should be of real concern to the international community.
• G20 economies applied 39 new trade-restrictive measures during the review period, including tariff increases, stricter customs procedures, imposition of taxes and export duties. This equates to an average of almost six restrictive measures per month, which is significantly higher than the three measures recorded during the previous review period.
• G20 economies also implemented 47 measures aimed at facilitating trade during the review period, including eliminated or reduced tariffs, simplified import and export customs procedures and reduction of import taxes. At almost seven trade-facilitating measures per month, this is marginally higher than the six measures recorded in the previous period.
• The estimated trade coverage of import-facilitating measures (US$82.7 billion) is higher than that of import-restrictive measures (US$74.1 billion) during the review period, but is approximately half the trade coverage reported for these measures during the same period in 2016-17. Moreover, the trade coverage of import-restrictive measures is more than one-and-a-half times larger than that during the same period in 2016-17.
• On trade remedy measures, the review period saw a slight increase in initiations of investigations by G20 economies and a significant increase of terminations, compared to the previous period. Initiations of trade remedy investigations represent almost half (49%) of all trade measures recorded during the review period. The trade coverage of trade remedy initiations recorded in this Report is estimated at US$52.3 billion and is significantly higher than in the two previous G20 Reports. The trade coverage of trade remedy terminations recorded in the review period is estimated at US$6.2 billion.
• At a juncture where the global economy is finally beginning to generate sustained economic momentum following the global financial crisis, the uncertainty created by a proliferation of trade restrictive actions could place economic recovery in jeopardy. The multilateral trading system was built to resolve such problems and it has the tools to do so again. However, further escalation could carry potentially large risks for the system itself. Its resilience and functionality in the face of these challenges will depend on each and every one of its Members. The G20 economies must use all means at their disposal to de-escalate the situation and promote further trade recovery.

Source:wto.org

 

 

149/ Is this the last chance to save the WTO?

The global trade order is under unprecedented strain. Its flaws have been evident for some time — the inability to conclude the Doha Round, launched in 2001, is the most obvious failure — but its inability to keep pace with changing business conditions is the real danger to its survival.

The battleground for this struggle is the World Trade Organization, which has been unable to promote free and open trade in which all competitors are treated fairly. While the WTO is one piece of a larger system, it plays a critical role: It resolves disputes and arbitrates conflicts. If the WTO is not “fixed,” the consequences will extend well beyond its offices in Geneva.

Three problems bedevil the world’s economy. The first is the structural imbalances that mark global trade. The United States runs persistent deficits, a function of the size and maturity of its economy. Yet while that is consistent with economic logic, the outcome is politically unsustainable.

That leads to the second problem: U.S. unilateralism to remedy those imbalances. Believing that the perennial U.S. trade deficit reflects unfair trade practices, President Donald Trump has imposed tariffs on an array of goods to force trading partners to get them to reform their trade policies and practices. Almost every trading partner has denounced the U.S. actions and most (but not all) have retaliated with tariffs of their own. Trump has responded with threats of further escalation.

There is a third problem, however: Chinese policies that have helped domestic companies at the expense of foreign competitors. Most notably, there are complaints that Beijing has forced foreign companies to hand over intellectual property as a condition of doing business in China. Trump has made that claim the cornerstone of his trade policy toward China, and European businesses concur: In a recent survey by the EU Chamber of Commerce in China, 20 percent of companies said that they felt compelled to hand over technology in exchange for market access.

The WTO is supposed to address such issues and, by doing so, vent pressure for unilateral action (and sanction countries that are prepared to do so). Unfortunately, the organization has failed to do its part and there is a mounting fear that Washington would ignore any WTO sanctions imposed upon it, compounding the institution’s failures and potentially fatally undermine it. For the Trump administration, WTO inaction confirms its belief that the institution is incapable of doing its job and protecting U.S. interests.

To head off the prospect of either WTO irrelevance or collapse, China and the European Union last week agreed to launch a group within the WTO that will try to fix those shortcomings by updating global trade rules. While the two sides have many disputes between them — Europeans believe that China is exporting its excess capacity and engages in anti-competitive practices, while Chinese insist that Europe denies their country its rightful status as a market economy — they recognize that WTO failure and U.S. unilateralism are greater threats. Jyrki Katainen, EU vice president on jobs and economic growth, explained that “we have to reform WTO in order to make multilateralism better functioning in the future. This unites the EU and China and the moment.” Failure to act, he warned, could mean that “the environment for multilateral trade will vanish.”

If that effort is to succeed, it must do two things. First, it must address hard issues. China’s competition policy, forced technology transfer and government subsidies that protect industries around the world must be on the table. Second, the project must be open to other governments and Japan should join. At a Cabinet-level meeting of WTO members held in Paris in May, Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry Hiroshige Seko agreed on the need for WTO reform, underscoring the argument that unilateral actions that ignore WTO rules will damage, perhaps, fatally, the trade order.

It is an extraordinary moment in global economic history when the largest trading countries embark on institutional reform efforts and do not include the U.S. Only last December, senior representatives from Japan, the EU and the U.S. announced that they were going to “enhance trilateral cooperation in the WTO and in other forums” to eliminate “unfair market distorting and protectionist practices by third countries.” Since then, however, the U.S. appears to have chosen confrontation over cooperation, and has picked fights with all its major trade partners. When those countries respond with tariffs of their own, U.S. officials have reacted as if they are the aggrieved party, calling retaliation “hypocritical” and dismissing it as lacking legal foundation. To denounce such statements as self-serving — which they are — is not enough. Concerned governments must fix problems that all agree exist and which give Trump the basis for poorly conceived and executed policies.

Source: Japan Times

 

150/ Trump makes veiled WTO threat after EU warning on car tariffs

WASHINGTON/BRUSSELS (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump warned the World Trade Organization on Monday that “we’ll be doing something” if the United States is not treated properly, just hours after the European Union said that U.S. automotive tariffs would hurt its own vehicle industry and prompt retaliation.

Trump, speaking to reporters during a meeting with Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte at the White House, said, “The WTO has treated the United States very, very badly and I hope they change their ways.”

His comments came after the Axios news website reported that Trump’s administration has drafted proposed legislation that would allow Trump to raise tariffs at will and negotiate special tariff rates with specific countries — two basic violations of WTO rules.

The United States has “a big disadvantage with the WTO. And we’re not planning anything now, but if they don’t treat us properly, we’ll be doing something,” Trump said, without elaborating.

Last week, a source familiar with Trump’s thinking told Reuters that the president has privately expressed a desire to quit the WTO, but that it was not a serious proposal.

Later on Monday, White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said Trump was focused on fixing problems in global trade, not on leaving the trade organization that has been a foundation of the postwar global trading system.

“Right now he’d like to see the system get fixed, and that’s what he’s focused on doing,” Sanders said. “He’s been clear that he has concerns, that there are a number of aspects that he doesn’t believe are fair. And China and other countries have used the WTO to their own advantage. We’re focused on fixing the system.”

U.S., EU TRADE TALKS?

During his meeting with Rutte, Trump also said that his administration would be meeting with EU officials to “work something out” on trade. The United States has imposed tariffs on European steel and aluminum imports and is conducting another national security study that could lead to tariffs on autos and auto parts.

“I think the E.U. — we’re going to be meeting with them fairly soon, Trump said. “They want to see if they can work something out, and that’ll be good, and if we do work it out, that’ll be positive, and if we don’t, it’ll be positive also, because we’ll just think about those cars that pour in here, and we’ll do something, right?”

A spokeswoman for the U.S. Trade Representative’s office could not be immediately reached for comment on further details about such talks.

The EU on Friday submitted comments warning the U.S. Commerce Department that U.S. import tariffs on cars and car parts were unjustifiable and would harm America’s automotive industry and likely lead to counter-measures by its trading partners on $294 billion of U.S. exports.

The Commerce Department launched its investigation, on grounds of national security, on May 23 under orders from Trump, who has frequently complained about the EU’s 10 percent car tariff being four times that of the United States, apart from the 25 percent U.S. levy on pickup trucks.

Trump said last week that the government would complete its study soon and suggested the United States would take action, having earlier threatened to impose a 20 percent tariff on all EU-assembled cars.

The European Commission, the EU executive body that handles trade for the bloc, said on Monday it was trying to convince its U.S. counterparts that imposing such tariffs would be a mistake.

“We’ll spare no effort, be it at the technical or political level, to prevent this from happening,” a spokesman for the commission told reporters, adding that commission President Jean-Claude Juncker’s trip to Washington later this month would seek to stop any new U.S. tariffs.

The EU exported 37.4 billion euros ($43.6 billion) of cars to the United States in 2017, while 6.2 billion euros worth of cars went the other way.

In its submission, the EU said EU companies make close to 2.9 million cars in the United States, supporting 120,000 jobs, or 420,000 if car dealerships and car parts retailers are included.

Imports had not shown a dramatic increase in recent years, it said, and had grown largely alongside overall expansion of the U.S. car market, with increased demand that could not be met by domestic production.

The submission said that tariffs on cars and car parts could undermine U.S. auto production by imposing higher costs on U.S. manufacturers. The EU calculated that a 25 percent tariff would have an initial $13 billion-$14 billion negative impact on U.S. gross domestic product with no improvement to the country’s current account balance.

The trade group representing Detroit automakers General Motors Co, Ford Motor Co and Fiat Chrysler, also warned the Commerce Department that a 25 percent import tariff on autos and parts would lead to a total new tax burden of $90 billion annually when combined with the steel and aluminum tariffs.

“Imposing tariffs will increase costs for consumers, lessen consumer choice, lower consumer demand, reduce car and light truck production and sales, lower investment levels, and lead to job losses in the U.S. auto sector,” Matt Blunt, president of the American Automotive Policy Council, said in a statement.

($1 = 0.8582 euros)

Source: REUTERS

 

151/ Taking action on global food safety in the latest ISOfocus

Why do food safety outbreaks continue to happen? We live in a global food economy and most people purchase and consume foods produced thousands of miles away that are often packaged in bulk to simplify food preparation at home and in restaurants. This leaves plenty of opportunity for pathogens to flourish and makes food-related standards that protect public health and reduce the negative social and economic impact of such crises a vital asset for organizations up and down the food chain.

The latest ISOfocus issue looks at the newly published ISO 22000:2018 on food safety management systems and how it can minimize these risks. Backed by international consensus among government and industry experts, the much-awaited International Standard harmonizes the requirements for good food safety practice worldwide. It is a powerful tool for taking action on global food safety challenges.

AFNOR Group Managing Director Olivier Peyrat writes in his introductory remark: “To help provide quality products that are safe for consumers to eat, the international test methods contained in these documents aim to establish uniform practices for detecting contamination, optimizing food controls and ensuring fair trade. ISO 22000 on food safety management will help companies identify and control hazards associated with their activities.”

Today, more than ever, the safety of food supplies is a matter of global concern. Safe food supplies support national economies, trade and tourism, contribute to food and nutrition security, and reinforce sustainable development. ISO International Standards create confidence in the products we eat or drink by ensuring the world uses the same recipe when it comes to food quality, safety and efficiency.

The July/August 2018 issue of ISOfocus shares stories from the sector’s thought-leading and top-achieving researchers, food safety professionals and standards experts. It also looks at the most recent and innovative standards for meat speciation and natural products.

What we cook up in this issue is ISO’s contribution to solving many of today’s food-related challenges, including state-of-the-art guidelines and best practice for all organizations in the global food supply chain, that safely provide food solutions to millions of people.

Finally, this edition of ISOfocus also features an exclusive interview with the Quality Manager of KMC, a Danish-based food ingredients company. Taking stock of the world’s food situation, Marianne Dam comments: “ISO has a huge advantage in being internationally known and, hopefully, the organization will take on the challenge and make it easier for more companies all over the world.”

Learn more about the global threats and complexities facing the food supply chain along with other interesting food facts in the latest ISOfocus.

Source:iso.org

 

Tin bài 05/7

152/ US: Bilateral FTA with us may be an own goal for India

Little wonder that the political, trade and economic relationship between the Hindu tiger fed on a vegetarian diet and the American eagle that had long transformed into a ‘vulture’ had remained ‘underachieving’.

In quixotic times like now, it may not surprise anybody if a tiger shakes hands with an eagle. So far, the two had maintained considerable distance, distrusting each other. But times have changed with the advent of supremacist governments. Little wonder that the political, trade and economic relationship between the Hindu tiger fed on a vegetarian diet and the American eagle that had long transformed into a “vulture” had remained “underachieving”. At a time when “China’s assertiveness suggests the US needs India even more than Mr Bush imagined yet it is in danger of getting less from India than he hoped,” argues The Economist in its Lexington column on 30 June.

It is pretty unusual for the column—which is sometimes seen as the voice of America’s invisible Deep State by strategic analysts— to focus on the fragile relationship between the US and India. Relations had remained strained between the US and India because of a spate of tit-for-tat actions on the trade front. “Replete with sparky, second-generation Americans (dominated largely by Non-Resident Knicker-Dharis NRKDs to quote historian Sanjay Subrahmanyam from his book, Is Indian Civilization a Myth?), who have deeper ties to India than their children will have,” it suggests a turnaround is possible.

Last week, trade and political representatives of the US administration, including President Donald Trump’s United Nations envoy Nikki Haley, visited India to set the ground for a new relationship. Reports in the Indian media on 28 June suggested unusual developments on the trade front. For example, one report suggested that New Delhi, which announced retaliatory tariffs against Trump’s punitive steel duties, could withdraw its action. Reason: it is working on a “white paper” with Washington that is expected to be fine-tuned by both sides at a meeting next month in Washington on sensitive trade issues, which can take from six months to 3-4 years.

Clearly, these are not insignificant hints. Obviously, some unusual developments are in the offing. In all probability and against the backdrop of Trump’s violent obsession with America First trade strategy based on a “fair and reciprocal” framework, it is plausible that the US and India are considering entering into negotiations for a bilateral free-trade agreement. Such negotiations often take a considerable period to produce an outcome that is acceptable to both sides.

But negotiations between the world’s largest economy of about $19.42 trillion last year and an economy of $2 trillion—with the world’s highest disease-burdened population, according to World Health Organization reports and per capita income an eighth of the American average (The Economist)— are incomparable in terms of interests. After all, the US is stacked with a range of hi-tech sectors in all areas, particularly in pharmaceuticals, and last but not least, the hundreds of billions of dollars of farming system. In contrast, India can only supply services providers and basic products such as steel and automotive parts.

Further, the US has had a historical track record of extracting concessions at each point/round of negotiations and then demanding much more. Consider the US-Korea free-trade agreement: starting from the Bush administration to the Obama administration and now the ultimate “extortionist” Trump administration, there has never been a moment when Washington changed the goalposts to accomplish its maximalist demands.

The US negotiating tactic has always been pocketing concessions while discarding the negotiating parameters at each juncture. During the several rounds of General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the World Trade Organization (WTO) negotiations, the US resorted to unusual muscular tactics. For example, the US extracted from India the trade facilitation agreement without agreeing to the permanent solution for public stockholding programmes. Washington had agreed on “less-than-full-reciprocity” commitments in 2004 to enable India and other developing countries to reduce their industrial tariffs and promised enhanced market access for the short-term services providers. India secured zero, zilch, nada.

Today, the Trump administration is saying India must provide reciprocal treatment in all areas failing which it will impose high tariffs on Indian goods, while imposing new barriers for the H1-B visas. Trump even threatened on Monday to take action against the WTO since he claimed the US has been treated very badly by the global trade body. “We are not planning anything now, but if they don’t treat us properly we will be doing something,” the President said, according to Washington Trade Daily.

In fact, a potential bilateral free-trade agreement with India must be sweet music to the American pharmaceutical industry, which can capture the Indian market in one stroke. The fact that the Narendra Modi government is considering such an agreement with the Trump administration is inconceivable. If it is true, then, it amounts to: Aa bail mujhe maar (inviting trouble)!

Source: Live Mint

 

 

153/ Food and the post-2015 development agenda

When 193 governments came together to agree a common framework to tackle 17 major world issues by 2030, standards were seen as critical to help achieve the United Nations agenda for sustainable development. With over 1 600 standards for the food production sector alone, ISO certainly has the means. But which standards are most relevant, and what kind of benefits – if any – can the food industry expect?

We live in a world where nearly two billion people are overweight or obese, yet more than 800 million go hungry. Add to that a growing population that is tipped to reach 9.7 billion in 2050 – that’s two billion more mouths to feed – and it’s clear that safe, sustainable and nutritious food production and distribution are one of our greatest challenges.

Feeding the world is, unsurprisingly, a key ingredient of the United Nations 2030 Agenda, whose Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) include a major pillar about ending hunger and poverty everywhere. Standardization can play a significant part in this effort, which is why ISO’s largest technical committee in the field of food has taken the initiative to place the 2030 Agenda goals at the heart of its work.

Destination “zero hunger”

“How close are we to zero hunger?” asks a report by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) on the state of food security and nutrition in the world. Not very, it seems, judging by the number of undernourished people, which has risen from 777 million in 2015 to 815 million in 2016. At the same time, worldwide obesity has tripled since 1975¹⁾ Ensuring food is sustainably produced in the right areas of the globe, therefore, is no easy task.

FAO is the custodian agency designated to monitor indicators across six of the 17 SDGs – namely, Goals 2, 5, 6, 12, 14 and 15. Covering areas such as eliminating hunger, building food security and a sustainable agricultural system, access to water and sanitation, sustainable production and consumption, and protecting forests and oceans, these six goals are among the key SDGs for food companies. In addition, SDG 3 “to ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages” is hugely relevant for food companies.

There are four other development goals equally significant to the agro-industry. SDG 9, for example, pertains to infrastructure, sustainable industrialization and innovation, while SDG 13 supports climate change action. Meanwhile, SDG 8 covers sustainable economic growth and full employment and SDG 17 calls for strengthening partnerships in pursuit of global sustainability.

Amid its extensive portfolio of International Standards, which contains globally recognized tools to help governments, industry and consumers contribute to all the SDGs, ISO boasts over 1 600 standards for the food production sector alone, designed to create confidence in food products and improve agricultural methods. Add to that those standards that help organizations manage their environmental impact, promote sustainable and ethical purchasing decisions and reduce waste, and it’s no wonder ISO technical committees are starting to map their work against the United Nations SDGs to see how they might contribute even more.

Partners in development

Leading the way is one of ISO’s oldest technical committees: ISO/TC 34 on food products. Since its inception in 1947, ISO/TC 34 has published nearly 850 standards – with another 120 in development – covering human and animal foodstuffs from farm to fork. It consists of 19 different subcommittees and working groups focusing on everything from food products and animal feeding stuffs to safety, vitamins and microbiology. The team of 307 experts from 138 countries is responsible for ISO’s flagship family of standards – the ISO 22000 series on food safety management – which provides guidelines and best practice for managing risks in all areas of food production.

Sandrine Espeillac, Secretary of ISO/TC 34, says an invitation by Codex Alimentarius to participate in a panel at one of their events last year was the catalyst for the technical committee to take a closer look at how food-related standards contribute to the SDGs and develop an initiative within the committee to see what more can be done to align future standards on the 2030 Agenda. Often referred to as the “Food Code”, the Codex Alimentarius can safely claim to be the most important international reference point in matters concerning food quality.

“The event was about the partnerships between Codex and international organizations for sustainable development,” Sandrine Espeillac explains. “I sat on a panel that discussed how we could all work together to contribute to the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. It was clear that many of our standards already do so directly – although the link wasn’t always made – and that there were also some gaps where standardization could contribute even further.”

This spurred the committee to embark on a project to correctly map current standards to the SDGs and to develop an entirely new technical specification that focuses directly on how the agri-food sector can offer its contribution.

The big disconnect

Social responsibility is one area where the link must be made more obvious. While there is increased awareness that businesses can indeed become a force for good in society and the world, companies still tend to use the SDGs as an indicator to showcase how existing business activities contribute to the 17 global goals. And the food industry is no exception. This further accentuates the “big disconnect” between business doing good while the state of the world is deteriorating.

To achieve the full potential of the SDGs for business, we must embed true sustainability into corporate strategy, and International Standards offer the chance to do just that. Take, for instance, the future ISO/TS 26030. ISO/TC 34 is working on a food-sector application of one of the world’s most referenced standards for social responsibility – ISO 26000.

The much awaited technical specification will give guidance on how to integrate the core issues of social responsibility in the food chain, which should serve to harmonize the different approaches at an international level. Its objectives include contributing to the SDGs by providing recommendations to businesses and organizations on how they can operate in an ethical and transparent way that contributes to sustainable development.

The example of cocoa

Standards already in development that have been identified as being easily linked to the SDGs include the ISO 34101 series on sustainable and traceable cocoa. Cocoa is an industry of relevance to the SDGs as it is predominantly a smallholder activity in developing countries. A labour-intensive crop, it often produces low yields, making it difficult for farmers to be economically viable.

Although there are a number of initiatives in place to help make cocoa farming more sustainable, there remains a strong need for harmonization to achieve uniform procedures and consensus on what sustainability in this sector really means and how those initiatives can truly serve farmers’ needs.

Due out as a multi-part series later this year, ISO 34101, Sustainable and traceable cocoa, takes a stepwise approach to sustainable cocoa bean production and specifies requirements for a management system, product traceability and improved performance. Featuring a dynamic farm development plan, it aims to implement good agricultural practices, protect the environment, and improve the social conditions and livelihoods of farmers. This has the potential to make cocoa farming more attractive to young people, which is important as the average age of farmers has risen rapidly in the main cocoa-producing regions over the last few decades.

Another ISO/TC 34 deliverable identified as being directly aligned with the SDGs is technical specification ISO/TS 34700 for animal welfare management. It helps organizations in the food and feed industry develop an animal welfare plan that is aligned with the principles of the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) Terrestrial Animal Health Code (TAHC) and ensures the welfare of farm animals across the supply chain.

Top of mind

As more standards are identified throughout the year and mapped to the SDGs, ISO/TC 34 will have the chance to promote the benefits of food standards, which should encourage broader uptake and further contribute to the SDGs.

But work doesn’t stop there. “This really is just the tip of the iceberg,” says Sandrine Espeillac. “Now that the SDGs are a key part of our business plan, they will be top of mind when future standards are proposed and developed. We hope this will contribute to a more sustainable food industry worldwide.”

As the custodian of world food security, the food industry has a unique opportunity to embrace the SDG agenda and use it as a driver of business strategies and innovation. To fully support organizations in trying to understand and contribute to the global achievement of the SDGs, new standards will be necessary. And these shall be sharper, more focused and pragmatic, so that we can one day hope to reach the United Nations target of “zero hunger”.

1) WHO, Obesity and overweight factsheet (October 2017)

Source:iso.org

 

Tin bài 06/7

154/ DDG Wolff: A “crisis can bring good results”

Speaking at the Geneva Summer Programme of the American University on 6 July, Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff said greater investment was needed from WTO members, business, and non-governmental organizations to craft a better multilateral trading system. While the system is presently under severe stress, past experience has shown that a “crisis can bring good results,” DDG Wolff said. The text of his remarks is below:

The future of the WTO is very bright.  (This is a faith-based assessment.)

In the far northwest of Spain lies the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela, a holy place that is a destination for pilgrims.  The roads the pilgrims walk vary in range from 300km to 800km.

The last three quarters of a century of trade policy has been a pilgrimage, somewhat like walking the road to the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela.  In the case of trade, our Cathedral, not yet reached — is free and fair trade — the elimination of all trade barriers at national borders.

The hardest route to Santiago de Compostela is the Camino Primitivo.  A description found on the web states: “The route is a continuous series of ups and downs composed of forest trails, dirt roads, stone or lose-rock paths and occasional asphalt roads. To undertake the Camino Primitivo, at least some prior physical preparation is advised.”

In trade policy, we have travelled a virtual Camino Primitivo.  It   has consisted of the unwinding of the 1930 tariff levels, first through bilateral trade liberalizing agreements, then the creation of the GATT, and then adding removal of nontariff barriers through plurilateral agreements, the addition of rules, and finally institutions through the WTO and its agreements.

We did not make it all the way to the Cathedral, which in the case of trade is unattainable.  It is a single market, like the EU and the United States, only global.   But we have traveled a significant distance along the path toward this gold standard for trade.

As far as I know, no one claims credit for stopping well short of Santiago de Compostela, turning his back on it, and taking the arduous Camino Primitivo in reverse.  Going backwards, retracing our steps, is not acceptable, not for any distance.

I am a believer in the arc of history, hereinafter the “AOH”, meaning inexorably, inescapably, inevitably moving toward freer and fairer trade.  There will be departures, there will be aberrations, and some may be major, but national interests will require a strong set of rules under the World Trade Organization.

However a caveat is in order: the AOH, the arc of history, is completely unreliable in the short term and extraordinary efforts are needed to stay true to it.

Well, how do we move forward?

1. Members and the WTO Secretariat need to increase the transparency of all barriers and distortions of trade.  By this I mean that the actual facts about why trade flows, or why it does not, need to be clear to all.
2.  Members and the WTO Secretariat need to increase understanding of individual WTO Member’s interests and concerns.
3. Members need to increase their compliance with their current WTO obligations.
4. The above steps should lead to increased trust without which new negotiations will not succeed.
5.  Of course political will is needed to make progress.

The world trading system was built on net contributions. This means going beyond reciprocal swaps of “I will reduce my tariff if you will reduce your tariff”.  There needs to be investment by Members in the trading system itself, which I think is now again a focus of Member governments.

Greater investment in the trading system is also needed by the private sector, by business and by NGOs.

Through these steps, the world trading system can get to a better place.

At present the world trading system is under severe stress, as nothing that has been seen since the early 1930s.  But a crisis can bring good results:

• 1930 tariffs brought on America’s reciprocal trade agreements program in 1934
• World War II brought Bretton Woods, and ITO, now GATT and WTO.
• A unilateral U.S. 10% tariff on imports in 1971 resulted movement toward the current international monetary system of floating exchange rates and in the in Tokyo Round nontariff barrier agreements — TBT, GPA and Customs Valuation.

This is a time of “ferment”.  The dictionary gives synonyms for “ferment”.  It can mean “mayhem”, but it also means “things being stirred up”.  Both seem to be occurring. Fermentation can lead to fine wine.  Not handled correctly the process results in vinegar.  The challenge for the members of the WTO is to make at least an acceptable table wine.

It is the responsibility of our generation to leave you a world trading system that is better than the one we inherited.  I believe that all those on your program who are associated with the WTO subscribe to that obligation.

But it will be up to your generation:

• To make trade freer and fairer,
• To make trade even more inclusive,
• To assure that the benefits are more widespread and the costs are distributed more fairly,
• To do even more for the planet — for the air, the water, the soil,
• To deal with further breakthroughs in technologies, and
• To leave for succeeding generations a multilateral trading system that is better than the one you inherited.

The purpose of life, our lives and yours, is to make a difference.

Source:wto.org

 

155/ Advanced Course on Trade and Environment concludes at the WTO

The fourth Advanced Course on Trade and Environment concluded on 6 July at the organization’s headquarters in Geneva. Twenty-five officials from trade and/or environment ministries representing 25 WTO members from all regions attended the course.

The advanced course (Level 3) was targeted towards officials who already possess a sound knowledge or are directly involved with issues at the interface of trade and environment at national and international levels.  The course aimed to enhance participants’ understanding of the key aspects of the relationship between trade and the environment as well as to update them on latest developments. The course also looked into the relevant WTO provisions and activities related to the linkages between trade and environmental policies, covering topics such as fisheries subsidies, transport, environmental goods, climate change and biodiversity.

In addition, the course provided participants with the tools to identify and discuss a wide range of topics at the nexus between trade and environmental protection, including several dedicated databases such as the Environmental Database and the Multilateral Environmental Agreement Matrix . Information tools such as the ePing for Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) and Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) measures were also covered.  The teaching methodology included roundtable discussions, workshops, lectures, exercises and simulations. Participants also had the opportunity to attend the Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE) meeting held during the course and follow it up with a simulation exercise of a CTE meeting organized the day after.

During the two weeks, participants were actively engaged in a group project aimed at using trade as a tool to support the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Agenda 2030. Each group was assigned an SDG and tasked to identify specific challenges and solutions, drawing upon their own domestic realities and experiences. At the end of the course, participants presented their shared vision, strategies and action plans which showcased how trade and trade policies can play a positive role in supporting the SDGs.

Source:wto.org

 

156/ Stronger cities for the future: a new set of International Standards just out

The populations of most world cities are growing fast, and with it come challenges and opportunities for keeping citizens safe and well. New International Standards for measuring and improving the performance of cities have just been published to help cities keep on top of the game.

Already, more than half of the world’s population lives in a city and that number is to grow to nearly 70 % by 2050¹⁾. Keeping up with rising urbanization and the stress it places on resources and infrastructure poses a serious challenge for cities everywhere, creating the need for effective planning, management and evidence-based policy making.

In order to make such decisions, cities need a reliable reference for measuring their performance, which is where the world’s first International Standard for city indicators comes into play.

ISO 37120 (Indicators for city services and quality of life in communities) was the first set of internationally standardized city indicators that provide a uniform approach to what is measured and how, when it was first published in 2014. For the first time, cities were able to communicate amongst themselves using globally standardized, comparable data, allowing them to get insights into other cities and learn from each other like never before.

Now, the standard has just been updated, offering even more indicators to help cities effectively improve the quality of life of their citizens and plan for a more sustainable future.

Bernard Gindroz, Chair of ISO/TC 268, Sustainable cities and communities²⁾, the technical committee that developed the standard, said ISO 37120 was updated due to city demand and a gap analysis that was performed, demonstrating the need for many new indicators, including those for culture, urban agriculture and food.

“Currently, nearly a hundred cities have implemented, or are in the process of implementing, the standard, and they have been very vocal in terms of what new indicators they want and need, which we have incorporated into the latest version,” he said.

“For example, there are now more comprehensive indicators on housing, such as vacancy rates and living space sizes, all essential if future cities are to manage growing populations effectively.”

City managers and planners, politicians, researchers and business leaders are just some of those who benefit from the use of the standard, which covers everything from education and energy to transport, health and water.

ISO 37120 will soon be joined by two other complementary standards on indicators for smart and resilient cities, providing a comprehensive suite of internationally agreed guidelines that help cities everywhere to thrive.

ISO 37122, Sustainable development in communities – Indicators for Smart Cities, and ISO 37123, Sustainable development in communities – Indicators for Resilient Cities, are due to be released later this year.

In addition, a third new standard has also been published to give city leaders guidance on how to develop an effective model for their city that can help them achieve their sustainability goals. ISO 37106, Sustainable cities and communities – Guidance on establishing smart city operating models for sustainable communities, provides a toolkit of “smart” practices for managing governance, services, data and systems across the city in a collaborative and digitally enabled way.

The standards are part of the ISO 37100 series, which includes ISO 37101, the overarching management systems standard for sustainable development in communities.

ISO 37120 and ISO 37106 are available from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

1) United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs: 2018 Revision of World Urbanization Prospects

2) The secretariat of ISO/TC 268, Sustainable cities and communities, is held by AFNOR, ISO’s member for France.

Source:iso.org

 

 

 

157/ Vietnam should be resilient to shifting megatrends: WB

The statement was made by Ousmane Dione, country director of World Bank in Vietnam, during a conference held on in Hanoi, themed ‘Enhancing Competitiveness, Realising Sustainable Development Goals’.

The event was co-organised by the Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry (VCCI), Vietnam Business Council for Sustainable Development (VBCSD) and the World Bank.

“Megatrends are regional or global in nature, and they are sustained and transformational forces that can re-define our world by changing the rules of the game,” Dione said.

Four specific megatrends Dione mentioned comprised of shifting trade patterns, rising knowledge economy, climate change, and an aging population.

“Megatrends present risks and opportunities, and the trick is to figure out how to leverage them to work in Vietnam’s advantage.”

Ousmane Dione also introduced key findings from the World Bank’s report ‘Vietnam’s future jobs’, which emphasised the effective exploitation of the mentioned megatrends and how these trends would affect Vietnam’s jobs structure and economic reform process.

“Jobs have been a fundamental part of Vietnam’s rapid transformation to a modern, globally integrated, middle-income country,” Dione said, adding that the country’s 50 million jobs, along with its shift towards services and manufacturing have contributed to plunging poverty rates and boosting strong economic growth over the last few decades.

“The world is on the cusp of new opportunities that could further shift Vietnam’s jobs picture. The rise of the Asian consumer class, especially in China, a shift toward knowledge economies, new trade partners and patterns, automation in the workplace, and aging, all threaten Vietnam’s current jobs structure, but they also offer opportunities.”

However, Vietnam’s job structure is not yet conductive to adapting to these megatrends, Dione said.

“The 21st century workers require a more complex set of skills than in the past. This is being driven by automation, where machines are taking over manual and routine jobs, as well as an increase in demand for products and services driven by the expanding consumer class.”

Meanwhile, a critical challenge in Vietnam is that only 8 percent of the labour force has a university education, which is insufficient to make the leap into the knowledge economy. Ethnic minorities, older workers, and pockets of youth in Vietnam are particularly vulnerable, he added.

Most of the country’s jobs are in family farming, household enterprises or low-skilled labour. Few jobs are currently positioned to embrace the megatrends. For example, only 2.1 million jobs are offered by foreign factories that pay above the minimum wage, while registered domestic firms provide no more than six million jobs.

To help Vietnam’s resilience to megatrends and effective implementation of sustainable development goals as well as improving competitiveness, the four types of capital – institutional, human, physical and natural – must be developed and deployed efficiently, equitably and effectively, he said.

He added that the WB’s report also identified three reform areas that would be essential to capture the job-related opportunities offered by a changing economic and social context. The first is to create more jobs in specific segments of the modern sector, namely via Vietnam’s SMEs, agro-industry, and value chains. The second is to enhance the quality of jobs in the traditional sectors, which is a significant part of the jobs landscape. The third is to connect qualified workers to the right jobs.

Matt Wilson, Director of Corporate Affairs of Heineken Vietnam, which was recognised as the most sustainable company in Vietnam by VCCI in 2017, said Heineken Vietnam is committed to building a healthy and safe workplace founded on mutual respect, diversity and the development of people.

“We are dedicated to helping our employees develop to their fullest potential through investments in training and development programmes that help them gain the necessary skills and knowledge to progress in their career path.”

In 2017, Heineken, directly employed approximately 2,800 employees and supported over 156,000 indirect jobs, equivalent to 0.3 percent of Vietnam’s total labour force, across its value chain.

At the event, VCCI Chairman and Co-chair of the Vietnam Business Council for Sustainable Development (VBCSD) Vu Tien Loc said that Vietnam would accelerate the economic reform process and become a high-middle-income country within the next two decades, with impressive achievements in social justice and equality and effective State management.

He emphasised the consensus and concerted efforts of all social classes, the effective support and cooperation of related parties and international organisations.

The conference also focused on issues and solutions to promote public-private partnerships, recommendations from the business community and international organisations to promote the implementation of the Government’s action programmes to improve productivity and competitiveness, towards sustainable development in the digital era.

The event was attended by more than 650 delegates, representing governmental agencies, ministries, localities, research institutions, international organisations and business associations.

Within the framework of the conference, the Ministry of Planning and Investment and the VCCI also announced the Partnering for Green Growth and the Global Goals 2030 (P4G), a new global partnership initiative aiming to facilitate and leverage strategic global public-private partnerships to contribute to the implementation of the 2030 Global Sustainable Development Goal through the implementation of Green Growth.

Source: VNS/VNA

 

158/ EFTA States Sign New Free Trade Deals

The European Free Trade Association (EFTA) states – Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Iceland, and Norway – signed a free trade agreement with Ecuador on June 25, 2018, and upgraded the bloc’s existing free trade deal with Turkey.

The comprehensive free trade agreement (FTA) with Ecuador was signed after just two years of negotiations.

Guolaugur Por Poroarson, Iceland’s Foreign Minister, said: “The fact that we have been able to conclude a very comprehensive Agreement in only five rounds is both a testimony to the political investment on both sides as well as the professionalism and dedication of our negotiators. This agreement covers all areas of a modern free trade agreement and the EFTA states are confident that it will be a solid basis for increased trade and investment between the parties. We are convinced that this agreement will create additional business opportunities for economic operators both in Ecuador and in the EFTA states.”

The Agreement will enter into force after completion of the necessary internal procedures for ratification by the Parties.

EFTA’s top exports to Ecuador include pharmaceutical products (worth about 60 percent of the total), chemicals, machinery, and mechanical appliances. EFTA’s imports from Ecuador are mainly fruits (worth 40 percent), cocoa, cut flowers, and precious metals.

Also on June 25, the existing EFTA-Turkey FTA, which entered into force on April 1, 1992, was upgraded and expanded, EFTA announced. EFTA’s main exports to Turkey are precious metals, pharmaceutical products, machinery and mineral fuel. Merchandise imports from Turkey consist mainly of vehicles, ships and apparel.

With the new agreement with Ecuador, the EFTA states have 28 concluded free trade agreements (FTAs) with a total of 39 countries worldwide.

Source: Tax News

 

Tin bài 10/7

159/ Tunisia initiates WTO dispute complaint against Moroccan book duties

Tunisia has requested WTO dispute consultations with Morocco regarding anti-dumping duties levied by Morocco on imports of school exercise books originating in Tunisia.

Tunisia alleges that Morocco acted inconsistently with a number of provisions of the WTO’s Anti-Dumping Agreement. This is the first dispute proceeding initiated by Tunisia at the WTO.

Further information is available in document WT/DS555/1

What is a request for consultations?

The request for consultations formally initiates a dispute in the WTO. Consultations give the parties an opportunity to discuss the matter and to find a satisfactory solution without proceeding further with litigation. After 60 days, if consultations have failed to resolve the dispute, the complainant may request adjudication by a panel.

• More on consultations
• Current status of disputes

Source:wto.org

 

160/ WTO holds workshop on SPS control, inspection and approval procedures

More than 150 government officials attended a Workshop on Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Control, Inspection and Approval Procedures in Geneva on 9 and 10 July 2018. The workshop provided a forum for discussions and experience-sharing on developments, challenges and practices in implementing Article 8 and Annex C of the SPS Agreement relating to these procedures.

Through presentations, practical case stories and discussions, the workshop aimed at expanding members’ understanding of the relevant provisions and jurisprudence on SPS control, inspection and approval procedures, providing guidance from various standard-setting bodies, and sharing regional and national experiences. Presentations and discussions also highlighted the economic rationale for strengthening the implementation of Annex C in order to reduce trade transaction costs, and addressed how the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA) links to, and complements, the SPS Agreement.

The workshop looked at SPS controls, inspections and approvals through the lens of trade facilitation in order to define ways to promote safe and efficient trade. Presentations by the World Bank, the Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) and the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) drew on actual experiences, provided estimates on SPS-related trade transaction costs, and identified win-win opportunities to facilitate safe trade, such as interagency collaboration and increased transparency.

Several members shared their experiences. In the field of food safety, the European Union presented its approach to a systems-based audit procedure, as opposed to individual inspections, for the implementation of EU legislation; the United States and Canada reported on their risk-based approaches regarding procedures and inspections; and China updated participants on its reforms in inspection and supervision systems for food imports.

The workshop also benefited from presentations by Turkey on its inspection system for animal and animal products; by Zambia on its interagency collaboration for phytosanitary controls and document checks; and by Belize on its experiences with third party certification to access export markets. It was recognized that although the resources allocated to SPS controls, inspections and approvals vary greatly between countries, innovative and cooperative approaches can result in entirely functional and effective systems. E-certification was addressed in a dedicated session of the workshop. Overall, participants recognized the widespread benefit of e-certification, such as reduced costs, improved security and expedited clearance.

The workshop ended with a roundtable, in which representatives from the World Bank, UNCTAD, the International Trade Centre (ITC), the World Customs Organization (WCO), and the WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement Facility (TFAF) discussed their ongoing trade facilitation capacity building programmes.

The Doha Development Agenda Global Trust Fund (DDAGTF) sponsored 32 participants, selected from developing and least developed countries, to attend the two-day workshop. In addition, the WTO sponsored the participation of four external speakers in the event.

Source:wto.org

 

161/ New standards for testing infant formula just published

Amongst the most heavily regulated and tested food products in the world, infant formula, and formulas for special medical purposes, come with rigorously checked nutritional labelling to ensure they are what they say they are. Not surprising given the population they serve. New International Standards have just been published to help manufacturers comply.

Food labelling is rarely more important than for vulnerable consumers – such as babies. It is no wonder, then, that manufacturers of infant formulas need to adhere to comprehensive national regulations and international standards like the Codex Alimentarius to ensure that the marked nutritional composition of the product is accurate.

Codex Alimentarius, or the Food Code as it is known, is the Joint Food Standards Programme established by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO), which develops harmonized international food standards that protect consumer health and promote fair practices in the food trade.

Test methods abound, but few were internationally harmonized and based on the Codex standards. Until now. Two new International Standards for verifying compliance of such products with labelling regulations for nutrients have just been published, providing a new inter-laboratory validated analytical technique.

ISO 20635, Infant formula and adult nutritionals – Determination of vitamin C by (ultra) high performance liquid chromatography with ultraviolet detection ((U)HPLC-UV), and ISO 20636, Infant formula and adult nutritionals – Determination of vitamin D by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry, are test method standards in support of the international Codex standard for infant formula and formulas for special medical purposes intended for infants. Agreed on a global scale, they can be used as reference methods for dispute resolutions.

Erik Konings, Convenor of the working group that developed the standards, said they will be of use to regulators and commercial laboratories, as well as manufacturers of infant formula and milk products.

“These standards provide an effective way of demonstrating compliance with national and international regulations as they represent a globally harmonized method of testing, in line with other standards-developing organizations in the sector, such as AOAC INTERNATIONAL and the International Dairy Federation (IDF),” he said.

“They were developed as there were no completely internationally agreed and harmonized standards of this kind, and will thus help to ensure the safety and quality of products for consumers as well as facilitating their trade on the global market.”

ISO 20635 and ISO 20636 are just two of a series of ISO International Standards that have been developed as part of the SPIFAN project (Stakeholder Panel on Infant Formula and Adult Nutritionals), managed by AOAC INTERNATIONAL in cooperation with ISO and the IDF, to develop standard method performance requirements and methods of analysis for 20 or more priority nutrients in infant formula and adult nutritionals.

The standards were developed by working group WG 14, Vitamins, carotenoids and other nutrients, of technical committee ISO/TC 34, Food products, the secretariat of which is held by AFNOR and ABNT, ISO’s members for France and Brazil.

Source:iso.org

Tin bài 12/7

162/ Japan becomes second country after Mexico to ratify TPP-11 trade deal

Japan became the second country to ratify the revised Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal on Friday (July 6), the same day the United States imposed the first round of prohibitive tariffs on some Chinese goods in a move many fear will lead to a drawn-out trade war.

The 11-nation revised deal, known as the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for the Trans-Pacific Partnership or the TPP-11 following President Donald Trump’s decision to pull the US out of the original deal shortly after he assumed office, will come into effect 60 days after it is ratified by six member countries.

Japan has joined Mexico which ratified TPP-11 in April.

The Foreign Ministry in Tokyo said in a statement on Friday that it hopes that the ratification “will be a powerful message from Japan, as the standard-bearer for free trade, to the world amidst the current global trend towards protectionism, and a significant step to create free and fair 21st century rules in the Asia Pacific region”.

“Japan will continue to work with other signatories to achieve early entry into force of the TPP-11 agreement,” it added.

Singapore’s Minister for Trade and Industry Chan Chun Sing said on Sunday (July 1) that he was confident that the Republic would be “among one of the first batches of countries to ratify the TPP-11.”He also expressed hoped that enough countries would ratify the agreement by the end of the year to bring it into force.

Australia, Canada and New Zealand have taken steps towards ratification, and Chile aims to do so soon. The other signatories to the deal are Brunei, Malaysia, Peru and Vietnam.

Japan, which took the lead to drive the TPP-11 negotiations amid the rise in protectionist tendencies, will be hosting working-level talks in the picturesque mountainside resort town of Hakone from July 17 to 19 to look at how to let more countries could be allowed into the deal. Thailand, Indonesia and Britain are among those keen.

The TPP-11 – which has been held up as the “gold standard of trade deals” – promotes trade liberalisation, and facilitates trade in goods and services, and investment, as well as establishes new rules in such areas as intellectual property, electronic commerce, and state-owned enterprises. It covers 490 million people, or about 6.8 per cent of the world’s population, 15 per cent of world trade and 13.4 per cent of the global economy.

Japan is also committed to helping push for the Asean-led 16-nation Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) by this year.

Collectively, the RCEP countries – Asean, as well as Australia, China, India, Japan, New Zealand and South Korea – account for about half the world’s population as well as 30 per cent of the world’s economy and trade.

Japan and the European Union are also expected to sign a free trade agreement when Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe is in Brussels next week, in what many observers saw as a signal from both economic giants of their rejection of protectionist tendencies in the world.

“We are seeing some acceleration of mega-FTA negotiations, to emphasise the importance of free trade and a rules-based international commercial policy regime,” Dr Fukunari Kimura, chief economist at the Economic Research Institute for Asean and East Asia told The Straits Times.

The ensuing improvement of the business environment in the Asia Pacific will invigorate Japan’s economy, he added.

Mizuho Research Institute economist Junichi Sugawara told ST that with the TPP-11, Japanese companies “will be able to build more efficient value chains, and it is expected that the Japanese economy will be revitalised with such integration”.

Source: The Strait Times

163/ TPP fuels Asia’s zest for regional free trade pacts

TOKYO — Trade negotiators from the 11 Trans-Pacific Partnership countries will gather in Japan from July 17 to July 19 to hammer out procedures for accepting new members into the bloc, among them Thailand, Indonesia and possibly the U.K.

The TPP-11, as it is known, will significantly change the region’s trade dynamic, despite the absence of the U.S., which pulled out after President Donald Trump took office.

Japan completed domestic procedures to ratify the trade-liberalizing agreement among 11 Pacific Rim countries on July 6, becoming the second country after Mexico to do so.

The countries signed the TPP-11 deal in March. The agreement comes into force when six member countries ratify it, paving the way for the creation, possibly by the end of the year, of a huge free trade zone that accounts for 13% of the world’s gross domestic product and 15% of global trade.

Since Washington’s departure, the Asian members have become the group’s core. Besides Japan, four countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations — Singapore, Brunei, Vietnam and Malaysia — have joined the pact. Other ASEAN members are also looking to join.

Thailand is one of them. When Japan’s Economic and Fiscal Policy Minister Toshimitsu Motegi visited Thailand in early May, Thai Deputy Prime Minister Somkid Jatusripitak told him that Bangkok was eager to join the TPP-11. Somkid asked Motegi to support his country’s bid.

Indonesia is another ASEAN member that has expressed interest in joining. During his June visit to Japan, Indonesian Vice President Jusuf Kalla said Jakarta will decide within about a year.

But will the trade pact really benefit these Southeast Asian countries?

TPP-11 nations are big recipients — 20% to 30% in 2016 — of exports from the ASEAN members that have signed the agreement, or are likely to join later.

In addition to being part of the ASEAN Economic Community, however, these ASEAN countries already have bilateral free trade agreements with such TPP signatories as Japan, Australia, New Zealand and Chile.

The only TPP participants with which these ASEAN nations have not struck FTAs are Canada and Mexico, and Peru in some cases. These countries receive only 1% to 4% of the exports from the ASEAN members.

The U.S. pullout reduced the clout of the trade accord. America is a major export market for these Southeast Asian nations, accounting for 10% to 20% of their exports, but only Singapore has a bilateral FTA with the world’s largest economy. For ASEAN members, the primary reason for being part of the trade pact was greater access to the lucrative U.S. market.

Some Southeast Asian nations have unsuccessfully tried to strike FTAs with the U.S. Jakarta agreed with Washington to a preliminary study for a bilateral FTA in 1997, but the Asian financial crisis torpedoed efforts. Thailand and Malaysia began FTA talks with the U.S. in 2004 and 2006, respectively, but negotiations fizzled because of unworkable U.S. demands.

But the situation began to change in the wake of the 2008 global financial crisis. The U.S. – ground zero of the crisis — decided to change its economic policy to make growth less dependent on domestic consumer spending and more on exports.

The administration of former President Barack Obama set its sights on Asia, the growth center of the world. Obama announced in early 2010 a plan to double U.S. exports over time and initiated TPP talks with seven other Pacific Rim nations. The negotiations lasted six years while the number of participants increased, until a deal was reached among 12 countries in February 2016.

But Trump, who took office in January 2017, immediately yanked the U.S. out of the agreement. Trump’s decision almost collapsed the TPP as ASEAN members had little incentive to remain in the pact, which required them to push through painful domestic reforms without the benefit of access to the U.S. market.

Malaysia and Vietnam opted to stay in the agreement, while Thailand and Indonesia warmed to it. There are two reasons for this.

One is the adjustments that have been made to lower the bar for entry into the pact. Of original provisions for joining, 20 have been put on ice. Most of these were requirements introduced by the U.S. Suspending these rules has made it easier to keep the pact alive.

One provision suspended in response to a Malaysian demand concerns state-owned companies, while Vietnam has been freed from a labor-related requirement. As for Thailand, its major concern was an intellectual property requirement about extending the terms of pharmaceutical patents.

During Thailand’s FTA talks with the U.S., a similar requirement was criticized at home. Critics argued that it would prevent production of low-priced generic drugs, delivering a blow to low-income earners.

Under pressure from its domestic pharmaceutical industry, the U.S. successfully demanded that the requirement be included in the TPP. The suspension of this provision has removed the primary obstacle to Thailand’s participation.

The other factor that has made the TPP-11 attractive for ASEAN members is that it gives participants an edge in attracting foreign investment.

Since the TPP has such broad rules for international trade and investment, including not only the scrapping of import tariffs but also rules concerning intellectual property and e-commerce, the pact will boost its appeal to foreign investors, according to Hirotoshi Ito, a senior economist for Asia at the Japan External Trade Organization.

“By pushing through domestic reforms to comply with TPP rules, a participating country can make its investment environment look better to foreign investors and boost its power to lure foreign investments,” Ito said.

Thailand and Indonesia are now keen to join because they want to avoid losing to ASEAN counterparts that are already in the race to attract foreign money.

The TPP has also given rise to another regional trade agreement initiative: the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership.

An Indonesian diplomat has said the RCEP is more important for his country than the TPP.

The RCEP is a regional trade agreement among the 10 ASEAN members plus Japan, China, South Korea, India, Australia and New Zealand. The idea was first proposed by ASEAN during the East Asia Summit in November 2011. The envisioned trade bloc would be responsible for 29% of global trade, twice as much as the TPP-11.

ASEAN was reluctant to embrace such a large regional free trade agreement. It already had a bilateral FTA with six key trade partners. The bloc also had an interest in maintaining the status quo, with its status as a free trade hub intact. The situation put ASEAN in a stronger position than many countries to attract foreign investment.

But the TPP has put strong pressure on ASEAN to change its policies. In 2011, when ASEAN proposed the RCEP, Canada, Mexico and Japan announced their decisions to join the TPP.

ASEAN feared that it could end up losing its leadership as the core of a regional free trade zone.

The TPP has forced ASEAN to adopt the second-best option of promoting a large regional free trade agreement in Asia, notes Kazushi Shimizu, a professor at Kyushu University.

Negotiations over the RCEP are facing rough going. But top trade diplomats from the 16 RCEP nations agreed in their Sunday meeting in Tokyo to try and conclude the pact by the end of the year. They were united by concerns over a global trade war triggered by the Trump administration threatening punitive tariffs.

The TPP and the RCEP need to serve as bulwarks against the rise of protectionism due to Trump’s trade agenda.

Ironically, the U.S., which led the negotiations for the TPP and previously championed unfettered trade, has become the principal threat to free trade, pushing Asia toward protective regional pacts.

Source: Nikkei Asia

164/ Switzerland initiates WTO dispute complaint against US steel, aluminium duties

Switzerland has requested WTO dispute consultations with the United States regarding US duties on certain imported steel and aluminium products. The request was circulated to WTO members on 12 July.

Switzerland claims the US duties of 25% and 10% on imports of steel and aluminium products respectively are inconsistent with provisions of the WTO’s General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 and the Agreement on Safeguards.

Further information is available in document WT/DS556/1.

What is a request for consultations?

The request for consultations formally initiates a dispute in the WTO. Consultations give the parties an opportunity to discuss the matter and to find a satisfactory solution without proceeding further with litigation. After 60 days, if consultations have failed to resolve the dispute, the complainant may request adjudication by a panel.

• More on consultations
• Current status of disputes

Source: wto.org

 

165/ Members advance discussion on the Fifth Review of the SPS Agreement

WTO members showed a high level of engagement in advancing discussions on the Fifth Review of the Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) at a meeting of the SPS Committee on 12 and 13 July. The SPS Committee also reviewed specific SPS concerns raised by members that are affecting international trade, and elected Ms Noncedo Vutula of South Africa as the new committee chair.

Fifth review

The SPS Committee discussed eight proposals submitted by 27 members, including many developing and least-developed countries (LDCs), for work under the Fifth Review of the Operation and Implementation of the SPS Agreement, which is set for completion in 2020.

The proposals cover recognition of equivalence of SPS measures, and in particular systems approaches; adaptation of SPS measures to regional conditions, including pest- or disease-free areas; transparency and notifications under the SPS vs the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Agreement; national coordination among SPS agencies; and trade issues related to pesticide maximum residue levels (MRLs).

In addition, members indicated interest in initiating work on risk assessment, appropriate levels of protection and the role of science; efforts to address fall armyworm infestation; and control, inspection and approval procedures (Annex C of the SPS Agreement), following up on the discussions at a workshop on this issue held on 9 and 10 July with the participation of 130 government officials.

The committee discussed the possibility of holding several thematic sessions and/or workshops to exchange experiences and hear from experts on the various subjects. The chair noted that it will be up to members to decide which issues should be addressed first. Several members also expressed interest in developing further committee guidance or best practices in areas including equivalence and regionalization, while others were cautious about embarking on such work.

Specific trade concerns

Members engaged in discussion on the ongoing multilateral efforts to develop standards on antimicrobial resistance (AMR). The debate was prompted by the European Union’s new veterinary drug legislation, which was recently agreed but not yet adopted. The EU said that the objective of the new regulation is to promote the prudent use of antimicrobials, for example by avoiding its routine prophylactic and metaphylactic use, reserving certain antimicrobials for treatment of infections in humans only and banning the use of antimicrobials in animals for promoting growth or increasing yield.

The European Union stressed the international dimension of the development and spread of resistant organisms and resistance determinants, and the serious concern that they could spread to humans and animals through food and feed, from direct contact with animals or humans, or by other means. It also reassured other members that the new regulation will be compatible with relevant international agreements, be legally sound, be applied in a proportionate and non-discriminatory manner, and be based on scientific evidence.

While sharing with the EU the view that AMR poses a serious public health issue that requires urgent attention, some members – Argentina, the United States, Colombia, Chile, Canada, Brazil and Australia – voiced concerns about Brussels’ approach to managing potential health risks by limiting trade in animal products, as it is likely to have an unnecessary restrictive impact on international commerce. These members said that by taking this approach the EU may undermine ongoing multilateral efforts to address this complex global challenge. In particular, they cautioned that potential EU restrictions applied extraterritorially will undermine multilateral efforts to combat AMR, such as those currently being undertaken collaboratively by the World Health Organization (WHO), the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE), the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the Codex Task Force on Antimicrobial Resistance.

Japan raised concerns regarding New Zealand’s draft import health standards for vehicles, machinery and equipment which require all used vehicles (cars and trucks) exported from Japan to be pre-approved by the government due to the spike in the number of brown marmorated stink bugs (BMSB) intercepted in shipments from the Japanese market. Japan complained about the short deadline provided by Wellington for comments on the notification and asked New Zealand to provide at least six months for preparation between the publication of the measure and its entry into force.

Japan stressed that approximately 300,000 new and used vehicles and machinery are exported from Japan to New Zealand every year and that, in order to satisfy New Zealand’s requirements, Japanese producers would bear extensive costs to introduce heat or fumigation procedures. Japan said that New Zealand has not presented scientific evidence to justify the measure and asked that the standards applied be adjusted to the appropriate level of protection.

New Zealand said that the BMSB measure was taken in order to ensure safe trade and that it is  working closely with Japan on this issue (a technical meeting was held in Tokyo on 9 July and a bilateral meeting on the margins of the SPS Committee) to find a satisfactory solution for both parties.

Brazil raised concerns about the European Union’s restrictions on poultry meat and poultry meat preparations. The restrictions affect exporters of meat of domestic ungulates (hooved animals), meat from poultry and rabbits, as well as minced meat, meat preparations and mechanically separated meat, who have been under judicial investigation on alleged charges of non-compliance with food safety standards. Brazil asked the EU to withdraw these measures on the grounds that they are not science-based and respond to the EU’s perception that certain export companies cannot be trusted to comply with sanitary requisites for the presence of pathogens.

The EU replied that the decision does have a scientific basis and takes into account the risk of cross-contamination when handling poultry meat, as well as consumption behaviour. The fact that Brazil, presumably in order to profit from a lower tariff rate, decided to add salt to fresh poultry meat intended for export to the EU does not justify why the EU should now change its science-based legislation, which is in line with international agreements. The EU added that Brazil was fully aware that, by adding salt to fresh meat, the end product would fall under the category of meat preparations, and therefore stricter Salmonella microbiological criteria apply.

On a related concern, Brazil raised concerns regarding Panama’s restrictions on beef and poultry meat. Brazil said that these restrictions were taken without due scientific basis and without justification on grounds of human, animal and plant health protection. According to Brazil, Panama did not provide technical justification for its decision to suspend the certification of seven thermos-processed beef and poultry establishments that had been previously cleared for export.

In its reply, Panama said that the corresponding evaluation process to grant export permits is underway and that the possibility of reviewing the decision is being considered. Panama added that it is willing to negotiate and urged Brazil to use the relevant channels to do so.

Brazil also raised concerns regarding the Russian Federation’s restrictions on beef and swine meat. According to Russia, this measure was introduced due to numerous detections of the veterinary drug ractopamine in meat products imported from Brazil. As a result, Brazilian exports from 60 establishments were suspended in December 2017. Brazil said it has opened an investigative process in order to assess possible irregularities and stated its commitment to establishing control systems and processes that guarantee compliance with, and fulfilment of, the sanitary requirements of Brazilian meat products exported to the Russian market.

Russia said that domestic food safety regulations allow no residues of ractopamine in meat and meat products and said that an existing agreement between both countries under which Brazil should certify the absence of this drug on exports was breached. As a result, Russia was left with no choice but to suspend supplies of Brazilian meat products. However, Russia said that is ready to lift the restrictions as soon as it is satisfied that adequate action has been taken.

Ecuador took issue on the application of the EU’s Regulation on maximum levels of cadmium in foodstuffs. This regulation will be implemented as of 1 January 2019 and aims to regulate the maximum levels of cadmium in different products, including chocolate and certain cocoa products. Ecuador indicated that, despite being a measure where implementation should be the responsibility of European health authorities, private import companies would be applying it in advance on the raw material (the cocoa bean), but not on the final product (chocolate and certain cocoa products). Ecuador, supported by Colombia and Guatemala, indicated that this was an incorrect application by private parties of a governmental sanitary measure, and called on the EU to grant the necessary control guarantees for its correct implementation in order to avoid that it becomes an unnecessary obstacle to trade.

In its reply, the European Union said it understood the concerns, but said that it goes beyond the remit of the SPS Agreement since it is about the action of commercial operators on which European authorities have no jurisdiction. For this reason, the EU said that this matter should be raised in other fora, like the International Cocoa Organization.

China raised concerns regarding the new European definition and maximum residue levels (MRLs) for fungicide folpet (a broad-spectrum, non-systemic fungicide used on food and other crops). China stressed that on 18 April 2018 the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) published a notification on folpet for public comments, with a deadline of 17 June, in which the revision of the folpet residue definition for monitoring purposes was recommended. China welcomed the proposal but asked the EU to issue the relevant regulations on the revision as early as possible.

In its reply, the EU said that its member states are currently reflecting on the need to change this residue definition, as there are indications that phtalimide may originate from several other sources than folpet. EFSA is currently conducting a peer review procedure and is expected to finalize this work next year. The EU said it is committed to keeping China updated on further developments concerning this issue and is open to continuing discussions.

Other trade concerns

Members took up a total of 26 specific trade concerns (nine of them new). Specific trade concerns previously brought up in the SPS Committee included US import restrictions on apples and pears, Thailand’s import restrictions on papaya seeds, India’s fumigation requirements for cashew nuts and other products, Viet Nam’s suspension of groundnut seed imports, South Africa’s and China’s import restrictions on poultry due to highly pathogenic avian influenza, and Mexico’s restrictions on imports of swine meat.

The SPS Committee also heard previously raised concerns regarding the Russian’s Federation import restrictions on processed fishery products from Estonia, China’s official certification requirements for food imports, the EU’s revised proposal for categorization of compounds as endocrine disruptors, France’s dimethoate-related restrictions on imported cherries, China’s proposed amendments to regulations on the safety assessment of agricultural genetically modified organisms (GMOs), and the US seafood import monitoring programme.

Want to know more?

The SPS Information Management System (SPS IMS) includes all SPS-related measures notified by WTO members and the trade-related concerns discussed in SPS Committee meetings.

Source: wto.org

 

Tin bài 13/7

166/ Reducing the risks of information security breaches with ISO/IEC 27005

In our hyper-connected, technology driven world, data breaches and cyber-attacks remain a significant threat to organizations, and a lack of awareness of the risks is often to blame¹⁾. A newly revised standard will help.

Protecting the security of a company’s information – whether it be commercially sensitive or the personal details of their clients – has never been more under the spotlight.  New legislation such as the European GDPR means organizations are under even greater pressure to ensure their information is secure.  But having the most appropriate technologies and processes can be a minefield. The newly revised ISO/IEC 27005:2018, Information technology – Security techniques – Information security risk management, provides guidance for organizations on how to wade through it all by providing a framework for effectively managing the risks.

Complementary to ISO/IEC 27001:2013, which provides the requirements for an information security management system (ISMS), ISO/IEC 27005 has recently been updated to reflect the new version of ISO/IEC 27001 and thus ensure it is best equipped to meet the demands of organizations of today.

It provides detailed risk management guidance to help meet related requirements specified in ISO/IEC 27001.

Edward Humphreys, Convener of the ISO/IEC working group that developed both ISO/IEC 27001 and ISO/IEC 27005 said the updated standard is a key tool in the ISO/IEC ‘cyber-risk toolbox’.

“ISO/IEC 27005 provides the ‘why, what and how’ for organizations to be able to manage their information security risks effectively in compliance with ISO/IEC 27001,” he said. “It also helps to demonstrate to an organization’s customers or stakeholders that robust risk processes are in place, giving them confidence that they are good to do business with.”

ISO/IEC 27005 is one of more than a dozen standards in the ISO/IEC 27000 series that make up the cyber-risk toolkit, led by the flagship ISO/IEC 27001, Information technology – Security techniques – Information security management systems – Requirements. Others in the series include those for protecting information in the Cloud, information security in the telecoms and utility sectors, cybersecurity, ISMS auditing and more.

ISO/IEC 27005 was developed by working group 1 Information security management systems of technical committee ISO/IEC JTC 1, Information technology, subcommittee SC 27, IT Security techniques, the secretariat of which is held by DIN, ISO’s member for Germany.

It is available from your national ISO member or the ISO Store.

1) Forbes - IT Security: Get The Optimal Level With A Management Policy That Points To The User

Source: iso.org

 

Tin bài 16/7

167/ Members seek to prepare roadmap for agriculture talks

With a view to preparing a roadmap for negotiations, the Agriculture Committee met on 16 July to discuss issues of “substance”, including domestic subsidies, cotton, market access, export competition and export restrictions. WTO members reviewed new submissions and held dedicated sessions on public stockholding for food security purposes and the Special Safeguard Mechanism to identify the way forward for these issues.

The Chair of the Agriculture Committee, Ambassador John Deep Ford (Guyana), said many WTO members were of the view that “agriculture should remain at the centre of any reform” and had “even stressed that agriculture was the only reason for them to be part of the WTO”. To establish a common understanding on specific issues, he encouraged members to reach out to each other in “a spirit of compromise, flexibility and creativity”.

Members responded to new submissions from the United States, China and India, Paraguay and Uruguay, the G33 group, and some members of the Cairns Group. They also outlined their negotiation priorities regarding various agriculture issues in response to the questions raised by the Chair in the convening fax.

Summing up the discussions, the Chair stated that he had been encouraged by members’ engagement and strongly believed “there is commitment by all members to achieve agriculture reforms”. He noted that the centrality of agriculture reforms had been emphasized by most members and that there were calls for members to redouble their efforts and find solutions to the challenges being faced in the negotiations.

The need for neutral and factual analysis and up-to-date notifications was highlighted by several members, the Chair said. The importance of information-sharing via workshops and seminars was also mentioned. Several members underlined the need for preliminary technical work to be undertaken by experts to inform the negotiation process.

Domestic support

The Chair said “for most members, domestic support remains the priority issue and the centre piece of the agriculture negotiations”.

India and China’s joint submission calls for the elimination of product-specific trade-distorting domestic support – known as aggregate measurement of support (AMS)  – above the de minimis levels (minimal amounts of domestic support that are allowed even though they distort trade) for developed members in four incremental steps, with the objective of “reducing the distortions in agriculture trade and asymmetries in the Agreement on Agriculture”. Currently, 32 WTO members have a scheduled AMS limit (i.e. a final bound total for AMS) that allows them to provide product-specific AMS above de minimis.

A submission by some Cairns Group members (a group of agriculture exporting countries) examined the existing agriculture domestic support categories in the Agreement on Agriculture, particularly those relevant to Article 6 and Annex 2, in order to better understand the situation and “inform the development of new and effective rules on domestic support”.

Members provided preliminary remarks on these two submissions and commended the efforts made by the proponents.

Cotton

Speaking on behalf of the Cotton 4 (Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad and Mali), Benin reminded members of the mandate to address trade distortions in the sector “ambitiously, expeditiously and specifically”. Benin thanked members who had recently submitted papers on domestic support and called again for updated data on all trade-distorting support measures.

The Chair acknowledged that cotton is an area of prime interest for many WTO members. He reported that some members had suggested that an incremental output could be feasible in this area.

The Chair urged all members to submit timely notifications and to reply to the WTO Secretariat’s biannual questionnaires on cotton so as to ensure up-to-date information is available on members’ cotton policies, values of production and domestic support levels.

Market access

The United States emphasized the need for a better understanding of members’ current tariff regimes and their impact on global agricultural trade. Its paper focused on six specific areas, including binding overhang, tariff peaks, complex tariffs and issues related to tariff quotas (TRQs).  In another submission on market access, Paraguay and Uruguay described possible negotiating approaches and challenges for tariff reforms.

The discussions during the meeting revealed signs of willingness among members to engage in market access issues. The linkage between market access and other agriculture issues was frequently highlighted by WTO members. While some stressed the importance of market access as a means of providing a balancing role in the negotiations, others believed that achieving progress in domestic support might be necessary before engaging actively in market access.

Export competition

Export competition was considered by some members as “unfinished business” in the areas of international food aid, state trading enterprises and export finance following the decision taken at the Nairobi Ministerial Conference in 2015.

Export restrictions

Many members said that improved transparency in the way members notify export restrictions and exemption of foodstuffs purchased for non-commercial humanitarian purposes from the application of such measures could constitute a possible deliverable for the negotiations. Some concerns were reiterated by other delegations.

Public stockholding for food security purposes

Indonesia presented a submission by the G33 Group (a coalition of developing countries) which summarized its negotiation priorities, including on public stockholding for food security purposes. The G33 submission highlighted the need to address the inequities inherited from the Uruguay Round and urged members to redouble their efforts to work towards a permanent solution for this issue.

The proponents expressed disappointment that the deadline agreed at the 2015 Bali Ministerial Conference to find a permanent solution for public stockholding had been missed and urged members to continue working on the issue, with a view to delivering an outcome at the next Ministerial Conference. Some members advocated that existing and future stockholding programmes should be covered by any permanent arrangement.

The Chair asked proponents to submit a detailed and substantive paper on public stockholding, and to be prepared to address any questions from members as to why a permanent arrangement is needed. He also urged more engagement and “problem-solving debates” on this topic in order to achieve a tangible outcome.

Special Safeguard Mechanism

The G33 listed the special safeguard mechanism (SSM) as one of their priorities for the next Ministerial Conference.  Noting the importance of the SSM for developing members and its link to the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals, the G33 called for members’ active engagement in this issue and stated that no linkage should be made to market access in the discussions.

Some developing members said that an SSM is necessary to give policy space to members when dealing with price fluctuations and import surges. On the other hand, some members viewed introducing an SSM as a step back from opening trade and therefore said it could only be considered in the context of further market access reform.

Having observed “two poles of deep divergence”, the Chair encouraged members to consult among themselves on the way forward. Members were urged to not only outline the technical substance of the issues but, more importantly, to address the obstacles.

Next step

The Chair welcomed members’ willingness to resume substantive work despite the persistence of differences on prerequisites, linkages and sequencing for the negotiations.

A more intensive meeting schedule will be circulated to guide the post-summer break negotiations, the Chair indicated.

“With hard work, increased flexibilities and enhanced engagement, creativity will flourish and we should make progress towards an outcome at MC12 and/or beyond,” said the Chair.

Source: wto.org

 

Tin bài 17/7

168/ DG Azevêdo receives experts’ report on future of global trade governance

WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo met on 17 July with representatives of the Bertelsmann Stiftung’s High-Level Board of Experts to receive their report on the Future of Global Trade Governance. The report outlines four complementary avenues that can be pursued to revitalize the WTO as a forum for trade cooperation and conflict resolution.

The initiative by the Bertelsmann Stiftung was launched in 2016 and welcomed by DG Azevêdo. The High Level Board of Experts is chaired by Professor Bernard Hoekman, Director of Global Economics at the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute in Florence.

Director-General Azevêdo said:

“These issues are high on the agenda for the international community today – and so the ideas provided in this report are very timely. I welcome this important contribution to the debate.”

“Renewed dialogue is needed by WTO members to address long-standing and recent use of trade distorting policies as well as the future governance of trade,” added Professor Hoekman, the author of the report.  “It is by keeping the channels for policy dialogue open that WTO members can best determine the way forward for the organization as an effective multilateral forum for trade co-operation and conflict resolution.”

The report was prepared by the High-Level Board of Experts independent of the WTO, and the report’s conclusions and recommendations reflect the views of the experts.

The four avenues outlined by the report to revitalize the WTO as a multilateral forum for trade cooperation and conflict resolution are as follows:

• Policy dialogue: WTO members need to establish a new work programme to address both long-standing and more recent use of trade-distorting policies that are systemically important;
• Support for open, non-discriminatory plurilateralism: members need to consider whether all members must participate in the launch of every new negotiation or initiative;
• Enhance the scope for the Secretariat to provide inputs: strengthening the ability of the Secretariat to support policy dialogue in WTO bodies and the work of WTO members would bolster the trading system;
• Review of WTO institutional performance: establishing a review mechanism that complements self-assessment by WTO bodies can present members with useful information on working practices, member engagement and outcomes.

The report stresses that a precondition for revitalizing engagement at the WTO is ensuring the proposed work programme deal with matters of systemic import and does so without undercutting the ability of poor countries to pursue development policies.

Source: wto.org

 

169/ Continuously instructing the implementation of Decree 15 on Food safety

Documents in dossier under reduced inspection method; cases of exemption from State inspection on food safety and the State inspection agency for import food are contents that the General Department of Vietnam Customs (VCN) has instructed local Customs Departments in implementing the Government’s Decree 15/2018/ND-CP on food safety.

Accordingly, instructions by the GDVC are based on proposals by relevant ministries and sectors.

Regarding documents subject to be submitted in dossiers under reduced inspection method, the GDVC said that Decree 15/2018/ND-CP does not specify that documents subject to be submitted or presented to the Customs Authority are the original or copy. Enterprises shall submit the copy certified by the enterprise to carry out Customs procedures.

For the inspection under the reduced inspection method, prescribed in Article 19 of Decree 15/2018/ND-CP, in order to implement document inspection of 5% in accordance with provisions, the GDVC is requesting Customs departments to develop a database and study the method of document inspection for enterprises subject to reduced inspection method.

Thus, in order to develop data, the GDVC has requested Customs departments to comply with the guidance at Point 5 of Official Letter 1511/TCHQ-GSQL (Customs Branch only request Customs declarant the first submission of documents specified at Point a, b Clause 1 Article 18 (copies certified by enterprise) when enterprises are carrying out import procedures at Customs Branches. The Customs branch where carrying out Customs procedures for import goods shall set up a data base to monitor, check and not request Customs declarant to submit these documents for the next import, and at the same time scan 1 copy to send to the GDVC for summarizing and developing database for Customs classification on inspection).

For cases subject to be exempted from State inspection on food safety, the GDVC has instructed that these cases shall be implemented in accordance with provisions in Clause 2 and 3, Article 13 of Decree 15/2018/ND-CP specified as follows:

Products in hand luggage of inbound passengers that are sent before or after the passengers arrive to serve their personal needs or their travel purpose in norm of Import Duty exemption in accordance with tax law; gifts within duty-free allowances.

Imported products for individuals and organizations eligible for diplomatic privileges and immunities shall be exempted from the State inspection on food safety.

For State inspection agencies for imported goods, currently, the State inspection agencies that are appointed to inspect for imported food under the management of Ministry of Industry and Trade, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, stipulated in accordance with Decree 15/2018/ND-CP, remains compared to the Decree 38/2012/ND-CP.

Thus, local Customs Departments shall continue to implement in accordance with point 3 Official Letter 1511/TCHQ-GSQL (The Customs authority shall base on the results of certifying of food that meet or not meet requirements on imports required by specialized ministries in accordance with Decree 38/2012/ND-CP to decide for Customs clearance). If ministries and sectors change the appointment for State inspection agencies for imported goods, the GDVC will notify to Customs departments.

Source: VCN

170/ Amid US Trade Tensions, Japan Formally Completes TPP-11 Entry

Japan’s Foreign Ministry framed the move as “a powerful message from Japan to the world.”

Japan has become the second country to formally lodge a notification that it has completed the domestic procedures for the Trans-Pacific Partnership-11 agreement (officially known as the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership). Tokyo signaled it would press other countries to follow suit, in a bid to bring the agreement into force quickly.

“Moreover, it is hoped that it will be a powerful message from Japan, as the standard-bearer for free trade, to the world amidst the current global trend towards protectionism, and a significant step to create free and fair 21st-century rules in the Asia-Pacific region,” the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement issued on July 6.

The move comes amid significant global headwinds over trade. Tokyo recently stepped up its efforts to prevent the United States from moving ahead with tariffs on automotive imports. It has previously made unsuccessful representations to get exceptions from the Trump administration’s tariffs on steel and aluminum. At the same time, the trade dispute between the United States and China has intensified, causing market jitters about the prospect of a damaging trade war.

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has so far resisted pressure from Trump to head in the direction of a bilateral trade agreement between Japan and the United States. Rather, Tokyo has made conspicuous efforts to back multilateral pacts, including the revamped TPP (which no longer includes the U.S.) and the ASEAN-centered Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), which would cover a greater share of global GDP thanks to inclusion of China and India. The latter deal remains under negotiation, with Tokyo having hosted a ministerial-level meeting at the beginning of July. The 23rd round of RCEP negotiations – focusing on issues such as market access, rules of origin, intellectual property, and e-commerce – is to be held in Bangkok from July 17 to 27.

Japan announced that it had completed the domestic procedures for the TPP-11 on the day it formally notified New Zealand, which is designated as the depositary for such declarations. The agreement specifies that the TPP-11 will enter into force 60 days after at least six signatories have given written notice of the completion of any relevant domestic legal procedures.

Japan, the government’s statement said, was the second country to do so after Mexico, and it hoped this would help build momentum toward the entry into force. “Japan will continue to work with other signatories to achieve early entry into force of the TPP-11 agreement,” it added.

Meanwhile, Japan is trying to head off potential U.S. tariffs on automotive imports. As previously reported on these pages, Tokyo is seriously alarmed by the impact of measures that could flow from the U.S. Commerce Department’s national security-related investigation into the sector. Japan’s economy would take a hit equivalent to 0.1 percent of GDP (or about $5 billion) if Washington slapped tariffs of 25 percent on imports of cars and car parts, according to modeling released by Germany’s ifo Institute in May.

Since then, Japan has published a strongly worded submission to the Commerce Department. Japanese auto-related companies, the submission argued, had played a vital role in supporting the growth of the U.S. manufacturing base since starting business in the United States in the 1980s.

“Any trade restriction measures based on Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, if imposed, could seriously affect more than 1.5 million jobs created by Japanese auto-related companies in the U.S., and by inflicting costs on the consumers, lead to devastating effects on the U.S. and global economy,” said the submission, released on June 29.

Japan also warned against “putting the global free trade system at great risk” – indicating the seriousness with which Tokyo views recent developments in U.S. trade policy. On the TPP, at least, Japan sees an opportunity to secure a win.

Source: The Diplomat

 

Tin bài 18/7

171/ Guidance on quality plans just updated

In order to effectively transform business ideas into actions, you need a plan. A quality plan. Guidance on how to create one has just been updated, providing a powerful tool to complement any quality management system, including ISO 9001.

Producing something – whether it be a product, service, process or project – always involves a series of interconnected or complementary processes and tasks that have to be performed, and planning them effectively in advance often leads to better results. A quality plan helps organizations do just that, as it includes a specification of the actions, responsibilities and associated resources that are needed to achieve the desired outcomes. It is useful as it describes how an organization will actually go about producing the product or service and how these actions can have an impact on other processes or parts of the business.  It is a particularly useful tool for validating new products, services or processes before the work begins and for demonstrating to stakeholders how their requirements are going to be met.

ISO 10005:2018, Quality management – Guidelines for quality plans, gives guidelines for establishing and applying quality plans, and it has just been updated to provide more guidance and more examples to be relevant to organizations of all shapes and sizes.

Roy Ackema, Convener of the working group that updated the standard, said that while it is not essential to have in place ISO 9001, ISO’s flagship standard for quality management systems, in order to benefit from the guidance of ISO 10005, the two standards are based on many of the same concepts and principles, making them highly complementary to each other.

“ISO 10005 was updated to reflect modern business practices,” he said.

“This includes improvements to the terminology and concepts as described in the 2015 version of ISO 9001, such as those related to addressing the needs and expectations of relevant parties and managing organizational knowledge.”

“It also offers more guidance on how to apply risk-based thinking to decide the processes, resources and methods to be used.”

ISO 10005 was developed by working group 26 of ISO technical committee ISO/TC 176/SC 2, Quality systems, the secretariat of which is held jointly by BSI, ISO’s member for the UK and SAC, ISO’s member for China.

Source: iso.org

172/ DDG Wolff: “Every effort must be expended” to improve the current trading system

Greater efforts need to be made to maintain and improve the international trading system, Deputy Director-General Alan Wolff said on 18 July. In remarks delivered in Washington, D.C., DDG Wolff said such efforts were needed to preserve and enhance economic prosperity and make trade freer, fairer and more inclusive. The text of his remarks is below:

The Good News About the World Trading System

Remarks of Alan Wm. Wolff Deputy Director General World Trade Organization (WTO) At Meridien House Washington DC

PART I.  THE ARC OF HISTORY

When I speak to students who are interested in international trade, I tell them that increasing economic integration across borders is inevitable.  That this is foretold by the arc of history.  That there may be deviations, divergences, but the long-term direction of change is immutably fixed and it is positive.  With the creation of the GATT and the WTO, the long journey began to bring about an open international trading system .  It will continue to evolve, with periodic stresses and detours on the road is set toward freer trade making improvements but never attaining a single global market.  This has been the work of the last two or three generations, it is the task set out for us, and it will be the work of those coming after us.  Deviations from this road may last for a year, a few years, or even longer, but logic will compel humanity to follow this course.

While not minimizing in any way the current turmoil in world trade, involving steel, aluminum, U.S. trade with China, and the threat of restrictions on automotive trade, it is worth taking as step back and taking a longer view.  Those who created the trading system, were not just visionaries, they were pragmatic, they were realists.  They saw a need for both sound political purpose and valid economic reasons to promote greater openness for trade across national borders.  This was true of Deng Xiaoping, it was true of Roosevelt and Churchill, and it was true of Schumann and Monet.  They saw the need for international economic integration.  To them open markets were required to promote peace, domestic and international, to surmount the episodes of chaos and mayhem that marred the 20th century.  They overcame major obstacles and the heritage which we was left in our care is not to be squandered..

In our time, technology is a principle driver and shaper of economic activity.  Today, one can communicate at no cost from almost anywhere on this planet to almost anywhere else.  This means that, if not prevented by government regulation or logistics, any person with a useful commercial idea, with a desirable product or a service that can be delivered over the internet, has the technical capability to gain access to customers everywhere.  National boundaries are no longer the natural barriers as oceans and mountain ranges once were.  With the information revolution and further innovations, global trade is being transformed and economies are being reshaped.

The differences of the present world from the past are myriad and so far-reaching that we are not fully conscious of them.  It is not surprising that it is now necessary to reexamine the rules under which trade is conducted and to judge whether they are still fit for purpose.  In this process, there is no WTO member whose basic interests should not be taken into account, as long as they are consistent with the purposes of the WTO.

The progress toward open borders is inexorable because It flows from an economic and political imperative.  In a more fully interconnected world, why should you as a citizen not take offense and resist government efforts to constrain your choice of to whom you sell to and from whom you buy.  Everything will be more global.  Financing is likely to be more cloud sourced in the future, and so will access to producers and customers.  We can see the beginnings continued experiments in the Baidu, Amazon, Netflix, Apple, and others of providing goods and services on a global basis.  What is harder to see, but it is there, are the major advances made in micro, small and medium enterprise which benefit from a global market,  These pioneers of any size, no matter how small, buy and sell irrespective of national borders, when they are allowed to do so.

The mid-nineteenth century industrial revolution could not be turned back.  The historic force of economic efficiency proved irresistible.  Fundamental irresistibility is equally a hallmark of the information technology revolution, and will also characterize successive waves of revolutionary innovation that will occur again and again.  The international trading system will over the longer term become more and more open because it has to be.  This is mandated not just due to technological change, but meeting other challenges, such as ameliorating the negative effects of changes in weather patterns, scarcities of water, of energy, of productive land.  These are some of the factors that will demand adaptation of the rules of international commerce, with the most sensible solutions being in the direction of more openness not less.

The inevitability of trade liberalization does not excuse us, the current generation, from making intensive efforts to maintain and improve the current trading system.  For in the near term, what we have will be of our own making.  If we wish to preserve and enhance the economic prosperity of our time, to make trade freer and fairer now, to make it more inclusive,

every effort must be expended to that end.  It is easy enough to throw away past gains, to fail to right errors, and to continue to underinvest in the multilateral trading system that has been passed down to us.

There is a lesson to be learned from current events,   A liberal trading system may be an economic imperative, but it must be politically sustainable as well.  This calls for actual and broadly perceived fairness, based on reality.   Freer international trade needs to rest on popular support.   There is much more popular support than one might think.  That is what polling data tells us, at least in the United States.  The majority support open trade through international trade agreements, and this support is even more pronounced among the young.

It turns out that the heritage we received, the international trading rules are not sufficient without the effort to maintain and improve them.

It is given to us to make a difference,  That is our purpose,  That is why we are here.  With effort we will succeed.

Part II.  THE WORK OF THE WTO

You would not know it from newspaper headlines, but nearly all world trade, which for merchandise exceeds $11 trillion, continues to flow every bit as freely as it did since the WTO was founded 23 years ago.  This is due to the WTO rules holding for most trade.  In fact, the rules have been improved in the last few years with the coverage of the information technology agreement being expanded, the Trade Facilitation Agreement coming into effect, and Members agreeing to ban agricultural export subsidies.  The effect of those agreements is to move trade even more freely.  Further trade restrictions are threatened, and they may be a multiple of those in place.  This is not insubstantial.  At some point, confidence may be sapped, investment plans put on hold or scrapped, and the effects can be far greater than they are now.

For the present, however, the fact is that the work of the WTO continues to proceed.  Members continue to be active participants in the standing committees of the WTO.  They notify proposed standards, receive comments and are able to take them into account in formulating final standards.  They review sanitary and phytosanitary measures to give greater assurance that necessary standards are also as non-trade restrictive as possible.  They make negotiating proposals on a wide variety of subjects in order to improve the rules further.  They are increasingly more open in stating their concerns and interests (although there is room for even more openness).

Ways forward are being actively sought to improve the conditions of agricultural trade, with respect to domestic subsidies, market access, export restrictions and food security.  A two-day workshop was recently held for members with presentations from experts from around the world to provide current facts to inform potential negotiations.

The negotiation with the most recent recommitment, which occurred at the Buenos Aires Ministerial Meeting last December, is the attempt to achieve disciplines on fishery subsidies, to avoid depletion of the oceans fish stocks.   The members have set a deadline of reaching agreement in less than two years from now, at the next WTO Ministerial Meeting.

The negotiation with the most recent recommitment, which occurred at the Buenos Aires Ministerial Meeting last December, is the attempt to achieve disciplines on fishery subsidies, to avoid depletion of the oceans fish stocks.

The members work together to provide technical assistance so that exporters in developing countries can more readily sell in world markets by helping them meet food and plant safety standards, fostering development and assuring human health at the same time.   They also gather to help the poorest cotton producing countries improve their yields of cotton and provide them information to help connect these producers with end markets.  I am fortunate enough to chair on behalf of the WTO Director General a consultative forum for cotton in which donors and recipients participate to increase the assistance and its effectiveness.

Twenty- two countries seek entry into the WTO.  In many cases these are conflict-affected countries.  Like many of the original members of the GATT, they have experienced war very recently.  The vision of Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt was that a key result of the Second World War would be that all countries would be able to trade.   The GATT was founded in order to aid in recovery from that war.  Europe moved toward a customs union and then a single market to foster peace and growth.  That is what many of the currently acceding countries seek – Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Sudan, South Sudan, Timor L’este, Somalia and Iraq, to name a few.  The last two countries to join the WTO were Afghanistan and Liberia, the latter of these having suffered through not only war but disease with the devastating effects of Ebola.

The administrative portfolios of the divisions that report to me, information technology support and translation, interpretation and publications, strive to make information more available to members and to the public.

This is not to minimize the seriousness of actual and potential effects of trade restrictions, those imposed and those threatened.  It is simply to note that the vast majority of world trade continues, and substantial efforts at the WTO to improve the conditions for trade also continue.

I have been in the trade field long enough to see a crisis put to good use.  In 1971, the international monetary system was breaking down.  The U.S. dollar, the world’s reserve currency, was backed by gold at $35/ounce.  Other countries were cashing in their dollars, of which there were a lot, due in large part to trade imbalances, for gold.   The U.S. was running out of gold.  It needed to devalue the dollar, and that was opposed by other countries, who feared that their exports would become less competitive.

On August 15, 1971, President Nixon imposed a 10 percent import surcharge, called for enactment of a rebate of corporate income taxes tied to exports, and put on price controls. The import surcharge was technically a violation of the then existing trade rules.  The tax measure was later found to be inconsistent with U.S. international obligations.  And the price controls would have driven close to all importers out of business, because for at least for a few days there was no provision made for passing the increased cost of the imports on to customers. On top of these measures, the U.S. demanded that Europe, Canada and Japan negotiate the removal of nontariff barriers without any additional trade benefits from the U.S.

The import surcharge was upheld by the Supreme Court as a national security measure.  But the crisis in fact led to a better place for the world economy.  With the Smithsonian agreement on December 18, 1971, the link of the dollar to gold was abolished, the dollar was devalued, and the surcharge was lifted.  The international monetary system was within a short period reformed to allow exchange rates to float.  The tax measure was condemned in the GATT and withdrawn, and the Tokyo Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations was launched, leading to the first major international agreements to reduce nontariff trade barriers.

There are no guarantees that current stresses in the trading system will end well.  But the 1971 example indicates that a crisis, well-managed, can lead to a better place for the world economy.

I have had the privilege in the last few weeks to meet with students from around the world.  What I tell them is that it is the obligation of each generation, including theirs, to leave the world in better condition than they received it.  I am optimistic that they will do so, and I believe that we can and most likely will do so.  That will not happen on its own.

We have to invest more in the effort to maintain and improve the international trading system.  It is the job of each of us to make a difference.

Source: wto.org

 

Tin bài 19/8

173/ United States initiates dispute complaints against five members over duties on US products

The United States has requested WTO dispute consultations with Canada, China, the European Union, Mexico and Turkey regarding additional duties imposed by the five WTO members on imports of certain US products. The request was circulated to WTO members on 19 July.

The duties were imposed in response to the additional duties imposed by the United States on steel and aluminium products. The United States claims the actions by the five WTO members are inconsistent with provisions of the WTO’s General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994.

Further information is available in documents WT/DS557/1, WT/DS558/1, WT/DS559/1, WT/DS560/1 and WT/DS561/1.

What is a request for consultations?

The request for consultations formally initiates a dispute in the WTO. Consultations give the parties an opportunity to discuss the matter and to find a satisfactory solution without proceeding further with litigation. After 60 days, if consultations have failed to resolve the dispute, the complainant may request adjudication by a panel.

• More on consultations
• Current status of disputes

Source: wto.org

 

174/ Honduras files appeal against WTO panel ruling on tobacco plain packaging requirements

Honduras filed an appeal on 19 July against a WTO panel report in the case brought by Honduras in “Australia — Certain Measures Concerning Trademarks, Geographical Indications and Other Plain Packaging Requirements Applicable to Tobacco Products and Packaging” (DS435). The panel circulated its report on 28 June 2018.

Further information will be available within the next few days in document WT/DS435/23

Parties to a dispute can appeal a panel’s ruling. Appeals have to be based on points of law, such as legal interpretation — they cannot re-open factual findings made by the panel. Each appeal is heard by three members of a permanent seven-member Appellate Body comprising persons of recognized authority and unaffiliated with any government. The Appellate Body membership broadly represents the geographic range of WTO membership, with each member appointed for a fixed term. Generally, the Appellate Body has up to 3 months to conclude its report.

Source: wto.org

 

175/ TPP negotiators gather in Japan to confirm domestic progress toward full ratification

Chief negotiators from the 11 signatories to the Trans-Pacific Partnership gathered Wednesday in Hakone, Kanagawa Prefecture, to check on their progress with domestic procedures to ratify the pact, amid fears of a trade war.

During talks through Thursday, negotiators will also discuss how to welcome other countries seeking to join the free trade pact — from which the United States has withdrawn under President Donald Trump.

“We can expect the pact to take effect early next year,” said Japan’s chief negotiator Kazuyoshi Umemoto at the outset of the gathering.

The pact, formally known as the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, will take effect 60 days after at least six countries complete their domestic procedures.

Earlier this month, Japan became the second country after Mexico to finish its domestic procedures to ratify the pact, which will cover around 13 percent of the world’s economy and about 15 percent of global trade by value.

Singapore and New Zealand are also making progress toward completing their domestic procedures.

Thailand, Indonesia and Columbia are among the countries seen as interested in joining the TPP.

The creation of such a massive free trade bloc in the Asia-Pacific region is apparently intended to counter growing worries about protectionism, as Trump has moved to apply higher tariffs on some imports from its major trading partners, including China, to correct what he sees as trade imbalances.

The negotiators’ meeting is the first since the 11 members signed the revised TPP in March, and comes a day after Japan signed a free trade agreement with the European Union.

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, who has viewed free trade as a key contributor to his Abenomics policy, has stressed the importance of multilateral trade frameworks such as the TPP.

Japan hosted in June a meeting of ministers from 16 Asia-Pacific countries who are negotiating to create another regional trade bloc, known as the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), with an eye to reaching a broad agreement by the end of the year.

Japan and the United States are also expected to hold their first round of high-level talks to discuss trade as soon as this month.

The 11 TPP members are Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam.

Also on Wednesday, Japan and Thailand held a high-level meeting to discuss how to promote multilateral free trade and strengthen cooperation on building infrastructure.

During the meeting in Tokyo, Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga said it is important to build a new regional economic order, referring to the ongoing RCEP negotiations.

Suga also said that frameworks such as the TPP are “closely linked to (Japan’s) free and open Indo-Pacific strategy.”

Thailand’s delegation, including a number of economic ministers, was led by Deputy Prime Minister Somkid Jatusripitak.

Source: The Japan Times

 

176/ Wooden furniture manufacturers thrive thanks to CPTPP

According to deputy chair of the Vietnam Wood and Forest products Association (Vifores), Vietnamese wooden furniture manufacturers have signed contracts to export products to Canada in 2019 totaling $300 million. The figure was less than $100 million a year in previous years.

In addition, four to five Japanese enterprises have discussed increasing the number of woodwork imports from Vietnam by 1.3 times in 2019.

Believing that CPTPP will bring more opportunities than challenges, Quyen said the agreement will bring three benefits to Vietnam’s woodwork industry.

First, the tariff will be cut to zero percent, thus paving the way for Vietnamese products to enter CPTPP markets.

Second, the lower import tariff on technologies and equipment will allow Vietnamese enterprises to buy more modern technologies and equipment from developed countries such as Japan and Canada which will help enterprises improve their productivity.

Third, Vietnamese enterprises will have opportunities to access strong partners in the world which help them improve corporate governance.

Quyen predicted that with advantages from CPTPP and the readiness of Vietnamese enterprises, woodwork export turnover would reach $9 billion this year.

In the last year, at least four groups of Vietnamese businesspeople went abroad to learn about the CPTPP 10 markets, especially in South America such as Chile and Peru.

However, Huynh Quang Thanh, chair of the Binh Duong Woodwork Processing Association, said Vietnamese enterprises still need support from the state in marketing, which remains a weak point.

Director of Woodsland Do Thi Bach Tuyet noted that Vietnamese woodwork manufacturers do not carry out R&D activities to find out which products the markets need.

At international trade fairs, if a Chinese or a Taiwanese enterprise is asked by customers about certain products, its staff will immediately make suggestions. Meanwhile, Vietnamese enterprises can only make products if they receive clear questions and detailed requests from clients. As a result, they lose a lot of potential clients.

Quyen from Vifores said CPTPP has many new provisions, thus, wooden furniture manufacturers need support from the state to take full advantage of the agreement.

Poor foreign language skills are a big obstacle for Vietnamese enterprises. So, it would be better if state management agencies brief the content of the agreement for enterprises’ better understanding.

Enterprises also need legal documents which guide the implementation of CPTPP and information about new policies in international trade which change regularly.

Source: Vietnam Net

 

Tin bài 20/7

177/ WTO panels established to rule on Canadian wine sale measures, US fish duties

At a meeting of the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) on 20 July, WTO members agreed to requests from the United States for a dispute panel to address measures governing the sale of wine in Canada and from Viet Nam for a panel to examine US anti-dumping measures on Vietnamese fish fillets. Members also continued discussions on matters related to the functioning of the WTO’s Appellate Body.

DS531: Canada — Measures Governing the Sale of Wine in Grocery Stores (second complaint)

The United States reiterated that it had serious concerns with regulations in the Canadian province of British Columbia (BC) governing the sale of wine in grocery stores. The US said the BC regulations exclude all imported wine from grocery store shelves, an important retail channel for wine sales in the province, and were inconsistent with WTO non-discrimination rules.  These restrictions limit sales opportunities for US wine in Canada and provide a substantial competitive advantage for BC wines.  The US was thus submitting its second request for the establishment of a panel.

Canada regretted the US decision to submit its second request and questioned the commercial rationale for the action, noting that imported wines account for around 90% of all wine sales in Canada and that there were almost a thousand points of sale for imported wine in BC alone.  Nevertheless, Canada said it was prepared to defend the measures before a panel.

The DSB agreed to the establishment of a panel.  The European Union, Australia, New Zealand, Israel, Chinese Taipei, Russia, Argentina, Chile, China, Korea, India and Mexico reserved their third party rights to participate in the proceedings.

DS536: United States — Anti-Dumping Measures on Fish Fillets from Viet Nam

Viet Nam said it did not wish to repeat the points it raised when it first requested a panel on the matter at the DSB meeting in June other than to note that the claims in the consultations had been subject to prior WTO dispute settlement and that each claim had been resolved in a manner favorable to Viet Nam.  At a time when the WTO’s dispute settlement mechanism is already overburdened, Viet Nam said the case should be settled without going to a panel.  However, Viet Nam has not received any positive response from the United States to resolve the matter, prompting it to request the establishment of a panel for the second time.

The United States said it was disappointed that Viet Nam has chosen to move forward with its second request and said that some of the items being challenged do not fall within the scope of dispute settlement proceedings.  The US said it would vigorously defend its rights to adopt anti-dumping measures with respect to unfairly traded imports.

The DSB agreed to the establishment of a panel. The European Union, Japan, China, India, Canada, Russia, Thailand, Egypt, Singapore and Malaysia reserved their third party rights to participate in the proceedings.

DS234: United States – Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000

The European Union reiterated its request that the United States cease transferring anti-dumping and countervailing duties to the US domestic industry, arguing that every such disbursement was a clear act of non-compliance with the DSB’s recommendations and rulings on the matter. Brazil and Canada thanked the EU for keeping the item on the agenda and called on the US to fully comply. The United States referred to its previous statement and said it had taken all action necessary to comply with the DSB’s recommendations and rulings.

Appellate Body appointments

Once again Mexico, speaking on behalf of 67 WTO members (including the EU 28), introduced a proposal calling for the establishment of a Selection Committee for the appointment of new Appellate Body members, the submission of candidates within 30 days and the issuance by the committee of recommendations within 60 days.  The considerable number of members backing the proposal reflects a common concern with the current situation in the Appellate Body – which is operating with only four of seven members – that is seriously affecting its workings and the overall dispute settlement system against the best interests of WTO members, Mexico said.

The United States again said it was not in a position to agree to the proposal. As it explained in previous meetings, the US said the systemic concerns it has identified remain unaddressed, such as the concerns that an individual who is not currently an Appellate Body member continues to decide appeals. It is the DSB, not the Appellate Body, which has the authority to decide whether a person who is no longer an Appellate Body member can continue to serve on an appeal. The US said it will continue its efforts and its discussions with WTO members and with the DSB chair to seek a solution.

South Africa (for the African Group), the European Union, Costa Rica (for the Latin American/Caribbean, or GRULAC, group) Canada, Japan, Pakistan, Australia, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland, Russia, Chinese Taipei, Hong Kong China, Chile, Thailand, Brazil, Singapore, Ecuador, Korea, Mexico (on its own behalf), Uruguay, Egypt, Turkey and Venezuela all intervened. Nearly all of the delegations referred to their previous statements on the matter.  In general, these delegations reiterated their concerns with the continued impasse regarding the appointment of new Appellate Body members and urged all members to show flexibility in order to resolve the deadlock as soon as possible.

Several members mentioned the growing dangers the continued impasse posed not only to the dispute settlement system but the WTO as a whole, and that members had an obligation under the WTO rules to initiate the process.  Others reiterated that the US concerns and the appointment issue should be treated separately, and some said the US should put forward ideas on how to resolve the problem.

Statement by the chair regarding the possible appointment of one Appellate Body member

The DSB chair said that she was continuing consultations with members on whether Appellate Body member Shree Baboo Chekitan Servansing should be given a second term, and would report back at the next DSB meeting in August. She invited any delegation with views on the matter to contact her directly. Mr. Servansing’s first term as Appellate Body member ends on 30 September.

Surveillance of implementation

The United States presented status reports with regard to DS184, “US — Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Products from Japan”, and  DS160, “United States — Section 110(5) of US Copyright Act”, while the European Union presented a status report with regard to DS291, “EC — Measures Affecting the Approval and Marketing of Biotech Products”.

The United States told members that on 4 June the US Commerce Department issued a final determination revising certain aspects of its original determination at issue in DS464, “United States — Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Measures on Large Residential Washers from Korea”. Specifically, Commerce revised the analysis underlying the original determination as it pertains to tax credit programmes, in accordance with the WTO ruling.  The United States continues to consult with interested parties on options to address the recommendations relating to anti-dumping measures challenged in the dispute, it added.

Korea said it was questionable whether results of the final determination properly reflected the rulings and recommendations of the DSB; it also expressed its serious concern about the absence of US implementation efforts relating to the anti-dumping measure at issue until now, more than 22 months after the DSB’s adoption of the ruling.  Canada said it was deeply disappointed that, despite the expiry of the deadline to comply, the US continues to collect cash deposits from Canadian exporters based on a methodology that was found to be “as such” inconsistent with WTO obligations in this dispute.

Other business

Honduras said it was taking the initiative to put forward an informal paper aimed at fostering discussions among members regarding concerns with the functioning of the Appellate Body. Honduras said it believes the WTO dispute settlement system is crucial to the satisfactory functioning of the WTO and that it was vital that all members start engaging on the issue in a constructive manner.

While there are several issues related to the functioning of the Appellate Body that must be resolved, Honduras said that the talks should start by addressing two core issues regarding Rule 15 of the Appellate Body Working Procedures:  the parameters governing the extension of Appellate Body members’ terms in order to allow members to finish appeals they are working on; and who decides on the extension of the terms. Honduras underlines that the only way to find a solution is through constructive dialogue and the engagement of all members.

The United States, Australia and Canada all thanked Honduras for the initiative and agreed on the need for constructive dialogue and engagement.

On another matter, China noted that the reasonable period of time for the United States to implement the panel and Appellate Body findings in DS471 (“United States — Certain Methodologies and their Application to Anti-Dumping Proceedings Involving China”) would expire on 22 August.  China said it was deeply concerned that there were no apparent steps being taken by the US to ensure compliance and urged the US to ensure implementation. The United States replied that it was aware of the upcoming deadline but said China was incorrect to say that the US was taking no action on the matter; the US also said it would be submitting a status report on implementation at the next DSB meeting in August.

Additionally, the United States said it was disappointing that the European Union had not provided a status report concerning the dispute “EU – Large Civil Aircraft” (DS316). The US noted that, for many years, the EU has taken the position that, under the Dispute Settlement Understanding’s Article 21.6, a responding party member is required to provide a status report whenever a complaining party member disagrees with the responding party’s claim that it has complied – as the US has done in DS316, where it said the EU has provided the United States with no information to support its claim of compliance.

The US therefore recently requested a WTO arbitrator to resume its work to determine the level of countermeasures it could impose on the EU for non-compliance. Given the disagreement on compliance between the parties, the EU should, to be consistent with the view it has taken when it is a complaining party, now be providing status reports, the US said.

The EU responded that it does see a difference with the DS316 dispute; since the case is under adjudication and compliance proceedings are pending, no status report needs to be provided, the EU argued.

Next meeting

The next regular meeting of the DSB will take place on 27 August.

Source: wto.org

 

178/ Azevêdo addresses participants at Geneva Week for non-resident members and observers

Director-General Roberto Azevêdo, on 20 July, addressed participants of “Geneva Week”, an event organized for WTO members and observers who do not have permanent missions in Geneva. He briefed the attendees on recent trade developments, including issues of particular interest to least-developed countries. He also highlighted the challenges currently facing the multilateral trading system and said the system should not be taken for granted. “It is only as resilient as our will to defend and strengthen it,” he underlined.

Good morning everyone.

It is always a pleasure to welcome you for Geneva week. I only wish we could see you more often.

So let me thank everyone who has been involved in organizing this initiative, especially the Development Division.

I understand you’ve had a very busy week, and have been briefed in-depth by our colleagues on a number of issues. So today I want to use this session to add my thoughts on how I see things moving forward. Then I want to allow ample time for interacting with you, and take any questions you may have.

2018 has already proved to be a very eventful year in trade.

No doubt you are all very aware of the escalating tensions between major trading partners. This is of real and very grave concern for us all. However, while we must respond to this situation – and we are responding – it does not mean that our work in other areas grinds to a halt. So before I comment on the current situation, I want to say a few words about the work that is under way in Geneva.

You’ve already heard detailed accounts of what was achieved in MC11.

Since then, Chairs have been appointed to all of the Negotiating Groups and work has resumed in these bodies. We are seeing members meeting and engaging across the board.

Looking ahead, I think that we need to maintain a sense of urgency on all issues.

Of course, agriculture and development are two of the most critical areas. But they are also the more difficult ones before us. And in both areas I think a more meaningful conversation is needed. We also have to deal urgently with issues such as public stockholding, where the deadline that members set has already passed.

On S&D treatment you all are aware of the discussions on development that took place at MC11, and the divisions which came to the fore.

Since then the Chair has been meeting the stakeholders in various formats.

I understand that members are showing interest in further exploring some of the useful ideas that have been put forward in the Chair’s recent consultations. This is an opportunity for constructive dialogue, building on the conversation that began in Buenos Aires. We should seize that momentum.

On other fronts, the Negotiating Group on Rules remains a bright spot. The group is pressing forward with its programme of work to advance discussions on fisheries subsidies keeping in mind the 2020 deadline of SDG 14.6.

I should also say a word about the initiatives that are happening outside the Negotiating Groups. This includes those initiatives launched in MC11 covering: e-commerce; investment facilitation; MSMEs; and women’s economic empowerment.

Although we must acknowledge that some do not support these initiatives, it is clear that they are evolving.

Whatever the issue, I think if we want to advance we have to recognise that there is still much work to be done. And we have to acknowledge that there are some fundamental challenges before us.

At MC11, it was evident that there are deep divisions and frustrations among the membership concerning issues of both substance and process.

Everyone agrees that the Doha issues should be tackled – but some argue that no other issue should be discussed until that work is complete.

That may be a legitimate aspiration – but it inevitably leads us to an impasse:

• first, because we know that we are nowhere near completion of the Doha work programme, and
• second, because others (while still very interested in advancing the Doha issues) clearly also want to discuss other areas.

The task now is to find viable ways forward.

We need to find a framework for our conversations that is open-minded and creative enough to allow fresh perspectives to emerge and new pathways to be explored.

These conversations are ongoing.

At the same time, important work is being work done in other areas, aimed at helping the most vulnerable members integrate successfully into the trading system.

One issue that has gained prominence in recent years is LDC graduation.

A good number of LDCs are expected to graduate from LDC status in the near future – and this includes some of you here today.

The international community puts a special emphasis on smooth transition so that there is no sudden disruption of support provided to the graduated LDCs. I absolutely agree that graduating LDCs need special attention and that the graduation process needs to be well prepared.

Discussions on this issue are under way. In June, an LDC reflections meeting was held here at the WTO. There is also a concrete proposal put forward, which looks at how to address some of the specific issues related to graduation in the context of the SCM Agreement.

This is certainly very positive.

In addition, WTO members have started a dialogue on how trade policies and practices can help in dealing with natural disasters, especially in vulnerable countries. In fact, your participation in Geneva Week has helped to bring this issue to the fore of the debate. This is a great example of the importance of this activity.

And there is much more in the pipeline. In the coming months, we will also launch a joint report with the World Bank on the role of trade in ending poverty.

And in October we will host the WTO Public Forum, where the theme will be ‘Trade in 2030′, putting a clear focus on the Sustainable Development Goals and their 2030 deadline. At this event, we will be launching studies on: the role of trade in delivering the SDGs; how trade and environment policies can work together; and, finally, we will be publishing this year’s World Trade Report, which looks at how digital technologies are transforming global commerce.

I am sure this is all of great interest to you, so watch this space.

I think that all this activity is very positive.

It shows that despite their differences, members see value in the WTO platform to tackle issues of importance to them.

In the current circumstances, this support has never been more important.

Tensions are running high. We are seeing the proliferation of trade-restrictive measures between members, with the announcement of new tariffs potentially covering many billions of dollars of trade.

The risk of further escalation poses a significant challenge to the system. We are already seeing the impact of this.

Recently, the WTO has reported a spike in new trade restrictive measures among G20 economies, as the number of new measures per month has doubled, with the estimated coverage increasing by over 50%.

This is very concerning. If the trading system were to falter, the consequences could be dramatic. Everybody loses from a trade war. And smaller economies stand to lose the most, as they don’t have the resources to cope with the chaos that would result.

So I am urging all WTO members – particularly the smaller members – to speak out in support of a strong multilateral trading system.

Another major challenge that we face today relates to the WTO dispute settlement system – or, more specifically, the situation regarding appointments to the Appellate Body.

The dispute settlement function underpins the whole trading system, and so the problems here are, again, extremely serious and urgent. I am urging leaders to show restraint, engage constructively to find ways to address their concerns and strengthen the system.

I should note that despite this situation, we are seeing members from all sides bringing more cases to the WTO. So members clearly still have faith in the dispute system as a tool to address their concerns, even though there is room for improvement.

All of these major issues have been the subject of ongoing discussion in Geneva, and in my talks with leaders around the world. They have been raised in various WTO bodies, including at the General Council. And it may well be discussed at the meetings of all members next week.

We should welcome scrutiny of the trading system. We should always be striving to be more efficient, effective and responsive to our members.

The system has been under pressure before, and each time it has emerged stronger. In 2008, faced with an economic crisis, the system proved its value, avoiding a proliferation of protectionist measures. In 2013, after years of deadlock, we proved we could deliver negotiated results.

Today, however, the situation seems different. Some of the recent trade policies and the rhetoric seem to be actively opposed to some of the aims and basic principles of the trading system itself.

So if we want the system to thrive, members need to act and fight for it. We cannot take the system for granted. It is only as resilient as our will to defend and strengthen it.

Our challenge today is to respond urgently to these difficult, systemic issues, while also finding positive routes forward in our deliberations. I count on all of you to that end.

We know that the WTO can deliver, so let’s use that experience to find new solutions and strengthen the system for the future.

As ever, I am ready to work with you to make sure that we advance and make progress in ways that support your development goals.

Thank you all for listening. I look forward to hearing your views.

Source: wto.org

 

179/ Pacific countries seek to expand CPTPP

Chief negotiators of the 11 countries involved in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) on July 18 met in Kanagawa prefecture of Japan to accelerate the completion of domestic procedures so that the deal will come into effect soon.

Head of the Multilateral Trade Policy Department under the Ministry of Industry and Trade Luong Hoang Thai led the Vietnamese delegation to the two-day event.

Japanese chief negotiator Kazuyoshi Umemoto expressed his hope that the deal will take effect on the outset of 2019.

According to consensus among the 11 members, the deal will come into force 60 days after at least six countries complete domestic approval procedures. Together with Japan and Mexico who finished all domestic procedures for the ratification of the pact, Singapore and New Zealand will fulfill all processes this year.

The participants also discussed measures to expand the CPTPP. Currently, Thailand and Columbia have showed their interest in joining the deal.

The original Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was signed by 12 countries in February 2016 but US President Donald Trump pulled his country from the deal upon his inauguration in January 2017.

The remaining 11 countries, namely Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam, signed the pact and renamed it the CPTPP in March 2018 in Chile.

The pact is expected to boost economic growth, create more jobs, reduce poverty and improve the quality of life for people in member countries.

It will create one of the world’s largest free trade blocs with a combined market of 499 million people and GDP of around US$10.1 trillion, accounting for 13.5 percent of the global GDP.

Source: VNA

 

Tin bài 24/7

180/ United Kingdom submits draft schedule to the WTO outlining post-Brexit goods commitments

On 24 July, WTO members received the United Kingdom’s draft schedule setting out its WTO market access commitments for goods once the UK leaves the European Union. Members will now have a three-month period to review the schedule that has been put forward for certification.

The United Kingdom considers this notification to constitute a rectification of its concessions under the WTO, on the grounds that the schedule replicates the concessions and commitments currently applicable to the UK as an EU member. Under this process, known as the “1980 Procedures for modification and rectification of Schedules”, WTO members will have three months to review the schedule, which will be considered to be approved if there are no objections from other members.

Source: wto.org

 

181/ DG Azevêdo: Now is the time to speak up for trade and the trading system

At a meeting of the full WTO membership today (24 July), Director-General Roberto Azevêdo outlined the economic and systemic threats posed by the growing tensions in global trade and called on “everyone who believes in trade as a force for good” to speak up in its defence.

The Director-General said:

“Members are well aware of the growing crisis in global trade. Tensions are growing. New measures are being announced with increasing frequency. There is real and justified concern about the escalation we are seeing. Whether or not you call it a trade war, certainly the first shots have been fired. Continued escalation would risk a major economic impact, which would pose a serious threat to jobs, growth and recovery in all countries. There is also a potential systemic impact, which poses a greater threat in the longer term, particularly if countries begin to accept this tit-for-tat dynamic as the new normal.

“The situation requires an urgent response. We have a duty to help resolve these issues, and to alert people to the potential risks and consequences. That is what I have been working to do. I have been consulting with members on these issues, and I have been meeting with leaders and ministers – urging dialogue and exploring steps to resolve the current situation. But I have also been talking to a wider range of contacts – such as parliaments, business, think tanks and the media – in order to increase awareness and understanding of what is at stake. Trade touches all of our lives. So I am calling on everyone who believes in trade as a force for good to speak up. Now is the time.

“In some ways I actually think we may be seeing some progress. Leaders are increasingly aware and engaged in WTO issues – in a way that I haven’t seen before. There is renewed engagement from many members on systemic issues, bringing more focus on the WTO and how it can be improved. I think that this could be positive – and could potentially help us to find a path out of the current crisis.”

The Director-General also addressed the impasse in appointments to the Appellate Body, stressing the gravity of the situation and the need for members to engage with renewed urgency.

Source: wto.org

 

182/ Getting upgraded: newly improved guidelines for testing machine-readable passports just out

Passports have come a long way since the days of clunky hand-written books and long(er) immigration queues. These days, the technology is as slick as the security is strict. Ensuring machine-readable passports work effectively and last their lifetime is therefore a rigorous procedure. ISO and IEC internationally recognized test-method guidelines have just been updated to do just that.

Machine-readable passports (MRPs) mean faster processing and more accurate matching against immigration databases and watchlists, which is why most passports these days fall into that category. To ensure they meet international regulatory requirements, they are standardized against the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Document 9303. The ISO and IEC standard for testing the durability of these MRPs is an official companion to the ICAO document, defining what is necessary for passports to be compliant. It has just been updated to make it even more robust and fit for today’s globalized world.

ISO/IEC 18745-1:2018, Test methods for machine readable travel documents (MRTD) and associated devices – Part 1: Physical test methods for passport books (durability), now replaces the ICAO’s own technical report for durability, specifying the minimum criteria to be achieved in order to meet ICAO’s expectations.

Tom Kinneging, Convener of the working group that developed the standard said it is essential not just to meet legal requirements but to ensure MRPs withstand the stresses it can be placed under.

“Having a MRP is only useful if it doesn’t fall apart or lose its readability over time,” he said.

“This standard gives details for effective testing so their feasible lifespan can be assessed, and they can thus be built to last.”

ISO/IEC 18745-1 was developed and updated by working group 3 Machine readable travel documents, which is part of the ISO and IEC technical committee ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 17, Cards and security devices for personal identification, the secretariat of which is held by BSI, ISO’s member for the UK.

Source: iso.org

 

183/ While U.S. Frets Over Tariffs, Europe and Japan Close a Trade Deal

One of Japan’s top officials said Monday that Japan is not interested in a bi-lateral trade deal with the U.S.

“Japan is not going to do anything with any country that harms the national interest,” said Yoshihide Suga, chief cabinet secretary in Japan’s government, told the Sydney (Australia) Morning Herald. “With FTA negotiations too, we handle them in that way.”

Since the U.S. dropped out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership in January 2017, the argument from the U.S. side has been that Japan and the U.S. are going to reach a bi-lateral trade deal. Suga reiterated that Japan will continue to push for the U.S. to rejoin TPP.

Last week, as reported by the Food and Environment Reporting Network, Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Pat Roberts told the Washington International Trade Association (WITA), “There is a danger we will be left behind” in the race for sales on the world market.

Roberts was voicing his concern on tariffs, he explained, “I have voiced my concern time and time again that tariffs placed on our trading partners pose a significant threat to the international markets upon which our economy relies,” Roberts said. “We have seen those threats realized over the past several weeks — notably exports of soybeans and meat to China. And the problem is only growing as other trading partners follow suit.”

As U.S. agriculture focuses on tariffs and looking for the light at the end of the tunnel, other countries are finally seeing the fruits of the slower, longer process of trade talks. Japan and the European Union announced earlier this month they are finalizing the Japan-EU Economic Partnership Agreement. The trade deal is the largest ever finalized (TPP would have been larger until the U.S. backed out). And the Japan-EU Economic Partnership Agreement highlights just how hard it is for two of the world’s most developed countries to come to terms on all the issues involved. Japan and Europe started these talks in 2013 and just closed the deal.

The EU-Japan deal has some serious ramifications long-term for U.S. meat exports to Japan.

The U.S. right now still holds an agricultural export advantage to Japan, selling $11.9 billion in 2017. The top U.S. agricultural products sent to Japan in 2017 were corn, $2.16 billion; beef and beef products, $1.86 billion; pork and pork products, $1.68 billion; soybeans, $980 million; and wheat, $720 million.

The EU exports $6.7 billion (5.7 billion Euros) in agricultural products to Japan, making it the EU’s fourth-largest market already. Over time, around 90% of EU products will be allowed to enter Japan duty-free.

Tariffs on pork, the EU’s main agricultural export, will be duty free for processed pork meat and nearly duty free on fresh meat. Tariffs on EU beef will be cut from 38.5% to 9% over 15 years. That’s pretty much what the Australians got, and basically what the U.S. was offered under TPP. So unless something changes, Europe and Australia both will have significant tariff advantages over U.S. beef.

For cheese products, tariffs on most European “hard cheeses” such as Gouda and cheddar, will go from 29.8% to duty-free.

And creating a whole separate problem for exports from the U.S., the EU notes more than 200 European agricultural products will receive Geographical Indication protection in Japan, meaning on the EU can call those products those specific names.

Last April, USDA’s Foreign Agricultural Service released a report stating the Japan-EU agreement threatens U.S. pork exports to Japan. As of 2017, the U.S. and EU were almost at parity when it comes to pork shipped to Japan. The EU sent over $1.696 billion in pork while the U.S. shipped $1.686 billion. The U.S. and EU essentially each shipped one-third of Japan’s overall pork imports.

According to USDA, the Japan-EU trade deal grants Europe basically the same deal Canada, Mexico and Chile got in the Trans Pacific Partnership. Japan will eliminate tariffs on more than 60% of its pork import products in 12 years. As the Foreign Agricultural Service noted, an array of different EU pork products will see tariffs come down or phased out in just five years as well. The Foreign Agricultural Service stated in April that U.S. ag exporters “will face challenges as the EU gains preferential tariffs under the Japan-EU EPA (Economic Partnership Agreement). Similar to the TPP, where U.S. competitors are gaining preferential access to important export markets, the EU-Japan agreement threatens to cut into U.S. market share and depress profits for U.S. pork producers who depend on export markets for over 20 percent of their income.”

As the U.S. works on the North American Free Trade Agreement, and battles with both China and Europe over tariffs, the EU has a deal with Canada and also reached a deal in April with Mexico. Now the EU is pushing to wrap up talks this fall with “Mercosur” countries — Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay.

Source: The Progressive Farmers

 

184/ G20 calls for stepped-up trade dialogue but no agreement on path forward

Global finance leaders have called for stepped-up dialogue to prevent trade and geopolitical tensions from hurting growth.

But they ended a two-day G20 meeting with little consensus on how to resolve multiple disputes over US tariff actions.

The finance ministers and central bank governors from the world’s 20 largest economies warned that growth, while still strong, was becoming less synchronised and downside risks over the short and medium-term had increased.

“These include rising financial vulnerabilities, heightened trade and geopolitical tensions, global imbalances, inequality and structurally weak growth, particularly in some advanced economies,” the G20 finance officials said.

“We recognise the need to step up dialogue and actions to mitigate risks and enhance confidence,” the communique said.

This marked a strengthening of language compared to their previous statement issued in March, in which they simply “recognise the need for further dialogue.”

“The latest language suggests a great deal of urgency about resolving these issues,” Australia Treasurer Scott Morrison told Reuters in an interview.

He added that the ministers had made it clear in the discussion that they were concerned about “tit-for-tat measures” and that open trade was the goal.

“The language previously had been a bit ambiguous about that, a bit sheepish,” Morrison added.

The weekend talks in Buenos Aires came at a time of escalating rhetoric in the trade conflict between the US and China, the world’s largest economies, which have so far slapped tariffs on $34 billion worth of each other’s goods.

US President Donald Trump raised the stakes on Friday with a threat to impose tariffs on all $500 billion of Chinese exports to the US unless Beijing agrees to major structural changes to its technology transfer, industrial subsidy and joint venture policies.

US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin told a news conference on Sunday that he had had no substantive discussions on trade with China’s finance minister, Liu Kun, at the G20 gathering, engaging mainly in “chit-chat.”

“Any time they want to sit down and negotiate meaningful changes, I and our team are available,” Mnuchin added.

The Chinese delegation did not speak to media at the G20 meeting.

Mnuchin focused instead on other trade relationships at the talks, including those with the European Union, Canada, Mexico and Japan.

He said G7 allies were taking seriously his calls to eliminate tariffs, non-tariff barriers and subsidies among the group, and the Trump administration would pursue such ideas in trade talks next week with European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker in Washington.

Canadian Finance Minister Bill Morneau called the dropping of barriers a “great idea” and an “aspirational target,” but said it would be challenging to execute because of historical economic differences.

Before any trade talks with the EU could begin, French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire insisted that Washington first would need to drop its tariffs on steel and aluminum and stand down on a threat to impose auto tariffs.

European Commissioner for Economic and Financial Affairs Pierre Moscovici told reporters that the meeting was not tense, but produced little movement from entrenched positions on trade.

“We were in mutual listening mode and I hope that this is the beginning of something,” Moscovici said. “But still the positions are not similar.”

Finance ministers for both Mexico and Canada said they saw optimism from Washington that an agreement to modernise the trilateral North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) could be reached in coming months after talks stalled.

Trump has angered allies by imposing import tariffs of 25% on steel and 10% on aluminum, sparking retaliatory tariffs from the EU and Canada on a range of US products.

Trump, who frequently criticises Europe’s 10% car tariffs, is also studying adding a 25% levy on auto imports, which would hit both Europe and Japan hard.

Mnuchin said he did not feel isolated at the G20, holding numerous bilateral meetings with officials, and arguing that Trump’s trade stance was not based on protectionism, but on trying to make trade fairer.

“We very much support the idea that trade is important to the global economy, but it’s got to be on fair and reciprocal terms,” he said.

Hubert Fuchs, European Council representative to the G20, said he welcomed Mnuchin’s candid approach, but said the US “understands something different under fair and free trade.”

Garret Grogan – Global Head of Trading at Bank of Ireland Global Markets – said Secretary Mnuchin’s comments that investors should not be concerned about the prospect of a looming currency war resulted in global foreign exchange markets opening in a calmer mood today after last week’s sharp moves.

Mr Grogan said the recent slide in the Chinese yuan, which is down more than 8% against the dollar since April, is showing faint signs that it may have stalled in the short term.

He said the focus for markets will now likely shift from China to Europe ahead of European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker’s crunch trade talks with US President Donald Trump on Wednesday.

“Last week the US Commerce Department held its investigation into how foreign auto imports are impacting US national security which was increased market concerns that President Trump will now seek to impose tariffs on autos and parts entering the US which would obviously heavily impact several euro zone economies,” Mr Grogan said.

“While initial comments from both sides suggest a deal is possible, the collective structure of the euro zone is likely to make it difficult to facilitate President Trumps predilection for quick bilateral trade deals,” he added.

“If talks do fail, auto tariffs of 10%, matching those currently in place by Europe, seem most likely although heavier tariffs can’t be ruled out, which would have a negative impact on the euro in the short term,” he concluded.

Source: Reuters

185/ Free trade agreements find few takers despite India’s high export hopes

Commerce Secretary Rita Teotia got the loudest applause at the Delhi Dialogue last week for her firm assertion that free trade agreements (FTA) India has signed up are not popular within the country, including the ambitious 15-nation Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP).

Addressing an audience of Indian business chambers like Ficci, external affairs specialists and delegates from some of the Asean think tanks, she said, “FTAs have to show they add to jobs. They have to allow our businessmen to do business with countries we have signed those with.” Her assertion makes clear that FTAs not only do not enjoy political support in India, the sixth largest world economy, but with only 1.65 per cent share of global exports, as per WTO data, they are also in the sunset mode.

The seven FTAs are not seen as necessary for India’s expectations to double the size of her economy by 2025. The government has plans to raise Indian exports from the current $302.8 billion (2017-18) to $1 trillion in the same period, but hopes to do so without sewing up new trade deals with partners.

The secretary’s outburst came within days after a media report that both India and European Union are likely to formally announce the end of talks to sign the FTA. India has not denied the report. Experts agree the FTAs India had signed on were based on creating political alliances and are seen as of little importance to push Indian foreign trade. So, politicians across the aisle treat trade treaties more as an albatross than electoral dividends. The suspicion is shared by the bureaucracy, too, as the generous support for the secretary’s position among the audience demonstrated.

Indian FTAs are rudderless, said Amitendu Palit, Senior Research Fellow and Research Lead (Trade and Economic Policy) at the Institute of South Asian Studies, Singapore. “The priorities also get muddled due to lack of convergences between commercial and foreign policy objectives. In most countries, FTA talks commence only after extensive consultations between foreign and trade ministries. In countries like Australia and Canada, these departments have merged as Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Such an approach appears to be missing in India”.

Agreeing with him, former IFS officer Ashok Sajjanhar said India’s FTAs with Bhutan, Afghanistan or even Sri Lanka were more for diplomatic reasons. “But even with the India-Asean FTA (signed in 2010) which had an economic logic, the political benefits are not made clear.” He said during his stint at the commerce ministry, an import of top end sarees from Bangladesh became a political hot potato as representations against the imports poured in from West Bengal.

The imports had to be scuttled.

At a larger scale, this angst continues. This month, India has announced a set of retaliatory tariffs on US goods. It has notified the WTO about its intention to impose tariffs on US imports worth approximately $240 million. The USA is India’s largest trading partner. “India is not one of the topmost exporters of steel and aluminum to the US and, therefore, would not have been hit as hard by these tariffs as larger exporters like Brazil, Korea and Japan would have been. Incidentally, none of these countries have resorted to retaliatory tariffs,” notes Palit. However, the commerce secretary said the concern on FTAs and the tariffs on US goods should not be linked though both reflect India’s increasingly clear demonstration of going solo in trade issues.

Former commerce secretary Rajiv Kher and now distinguished fellow, RIS, during whose term India was close to sewing up an FTA with Australia, agrees it would politically have been difficult to sell the benefits.

“FTAs work best when there is a complementarity, and in this case we would have suffered.” Kher did not offer any remarks on why New Delhi had engaged Canberra for the aborted trade talks, in the first place. Though Sajjanhar says it was the commerce ministry that primarily pushed the FTAs, once the political high noon was over, the eventual negotiations ensured a shallow FTA. The India-Singapore CECA was signed in 2005 on for India to escape the repeated stock market meltdowns due to perceived flow of hot money from Mauritius. Once that scare passed, the treaty lurched. India has exported just $10.2 billion to the island in 2017-18 and imported goods worth $7.5 billion.

While the commerce ministry feels there is enough room to add to India’s trade with countries, there is no reason to rush to sew up preferential trade agreements. Teotia said, “Once we signed on the India-Asean FTA in 2010, the pressure has built on us to be more ambitious in RCEP. The ambition is too high on goods and low on services”. She added that India will remain engaged with the negotiations, though.

Source: Business Standard

186/ Japan to resist bilateral trade deal with US and push for TPP

TOKYO • One of Japan’s top policy-makers had indicated that the government will continue to resist US efforts to create a bilateral free trade agreement (FTA) between the two countries.

“Japan is not going to do anything with any country that harms the national interest,” said Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga.

“With FTA negotiations too, we will handle them in that way,” he told Bloomberg in an interview last Saturday.

Economy Minister Toshimitsu Motegi and US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer are expected to sit down for bilateral trade discussions later this month.

Mr Suga said he knows the US side is keenly interested in a bilateral trade deal, but Japan will continue to insist that the US’ return to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement is in the best interests of both countries.

Singapore last week ratified the revised TPP free trade deal, now known as the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), or TPP-11, becoming the third nation to do so after Mexico and Japan.

President Donald Trump pulled the US out of the original TPP agreement during his first week in office.

Mr Suga’s comments came as officials from the Group of 20 (G-20) countries meeting in Argentina pushed back against the Trump administration, which has shunned multilateral agreements and embraced tariffs.

At the G-20, Finance Minister Taro Aso pressed US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin to alleviate Japan’s concerns over trade, discussing US tariffs on steel and aluminium, as well as possible levies on car and auto part imports.

Washington has imposed steep tariffs on steel and aluminium imports from major producers, including the European Union and China, citing concerns that a glut of the metals was hurting US industry and threatening national security.

The EU, which has launched retaliatory tariffs against American goods, announced last week that it will launch measures designed to prevent a surge of steel imports from other places into the bloc.The main exporters of steel to the EU are China, India, Russia, South Korea, Turkey and Ukraine.

The European Commission said that the EU steel industry was “in a fragile situation and vulnerable to a further increase in imports”, with US tariffs reducing its capacity to sell there making the industry even more vulnerable.

China’s Commerce Ministry said yesterday that it has launched an anti-dumping probe into imports of stainless steel billets and hot-rolled stainless steel sheets and plates from the EU, Japan, South Korea and Indonesia. The move follows a complaint by Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel, with backing from four other mills, including Baosteel’s stainless steel division, it said.

China makes and consumes around half of the world’s stainless steel, which is used to protect against corrosion in buildings, transportation and packaging.

While the complaint targets eight foreign producers, it also lists a number of Chinese companies, including the Indonesian unit of one of the world’s top producers, Tsingshan Stainless Steel, and 19 traders which import the products.

Some private Chinese companies have opened or started building plants in Indonesia in recent years, drawing on its plentiful nickel resources and lower cost of production.

Source: The Straitstimes

 

Tin bài 25/7

187/ Informal meeting of the Trade Policy Review Body — Trade monitoring report

Thank you Ambassador Laourou.

Good afternoon everyone.

We are here to take stock of the major developments in trade policy since we last met in December last year.

You will have seen my report, which was circulated to members on 10 July in document WT/TPR/OV/W/12.

This report covers the period from mid-October 2017 to mid-May 2018. It provides an overview over this period in terms of:

• the latest trends and developments in trade policy-making,
• the state of world trade, and
• the overall outlook for the global economy.

As you know, this is a precursor to my annual report on this subject, which will be released later in the year.

Since it came into being in 2009, this exercise has been essential to reinforcing transparency and predictability in the multilateral trading system.

Before I outline the key findings of the Report, let me say a few words of background.

It is worth underlining that this Report is purely factual. It has no legal effect on the rights and obligations of WTO members. It does not seek to pass any judgement on whether a trade measure is protectionist or not. Nor does it question the explicit right of members to adopt certain trade measures.

The information included in this Report has been collected from inputs submitted by:

• members,
• observers,
• as well as from other official and public sources.

I would like to thank all the delegations that have participated in this exercise for providing relevant information on time and ensuring the verification of reported measures.

For this current mid-year report, 71 members replied to my initial request for information. This represents about 43% of the membership and covers about 92% of world imports. While this is a slightly higher participation compared to the last mid-year report, I continue to believe that we can do better. We should aim to make this exercise as inclusive as possible.

Participation in the verification process continues to be uneven. An increasing number of delegations have recently requested specific measures to be omitted from the Monitoring Report, despite the fact that they refer to official sources. This is of serious concern. The commitment to this transparency exercise should not be selective.

I would therefore encourage all Members to be fully open and committed to these efforts. Of course, the Secretariat will continue to be available to help you increase your understanding of this exercise and to support your participation.

Now allow me to turn to the substance of the report.

The headline is that 75 new trade-restrictive measures were put in place during the reporting period. I recall that, of course, this does not include trade remedy measures.

This amounts to an average of almost 11 new measures per month. It is an increase on the previous annual report, which recorded an average of 9 measures per month.

The Report also shows that WTO members implemented 89 new trade-facilitating measures. This represents an average of almost 13 trade-facilitating measures per month. This is an increase compared to the average of 11 measures recorded for the previous review period.

Looking at the trade coverage of these measures helps to give a better perspective of their impact.

The trade coverage of the import-restrictive measures is estimated at 85 billion dollars. The trade coverage of the import-facilitating measures is estimated at 107 billion US dollars.

At a first glance, this might sound encouraging. However, the ratio between the coverage of import-facilitating measures and import-restrictive measures has declined significantly from the 2:1 ratio we had recorded in the previous Report.

This shift could have damaging ramifications for economic recovery. It should be of real concern to the international community.

After years of sluggish growth following the 2008 economic crisis, the global economy has finally begun to generate sustained economic momentum. World trade growth increased dramatically in 2017, and it seems to be on a positive trajectory.

However, this could be jeopardized by the marked increase in new trade restrictive measures among WTO members.

It is important to note that the period covered by this Report ends in mid-May. Numerous additional trade-restrictive measures have been announced in the two months since then. Therefore the deterioration in trade relations may be even worse than that recorded here. This continued escalation poses a serious threat to growth and recovery in all countries. We are beginning to see this reflected in some forward-looking indicators.

We will continue to monitor this situation. I urge members to redouble efforts to refrain from implementing new trade-restrictive measures, and to reverse existing measures.

Members should come to the table and work to resolve these issues with great urgency. I am working with all members to this end as I set out in detail in the HoDs/TNC meeting yesterday.

Now, let me say a few words about the other findings of the Report.

With respect to trade remedies, the Report recorded a stable pace in initiations of trade remedy investigations by WTO members. It also recorded an increase in terminations of trade remedy actions compared to the previous period.

Initiations of trade remedy investigations represented 40% of all trade measures recorded in the Report. Initiations of anti-dumping investigations account for almost 80% of these measures. The trade coverage of trade remedy initiations was estimated at 53 billion dollars. This is almost double the trade coverage recorded for these measures during the same period in 2016-17.

Now let me turn to trade in services. The report confirms past findings that the majority of measures in the services sector provided for additional liberalization, especially through the strengthening and clarification of regulatory requirements. At the same time, several new policies implemented during the review period appear to have trade-restrictive consequences. This is something we will be paying close attention to in future reports.

Looking at SPS and TBT measures, WTO members’ notifications increased during the review period. The majority of these new notifications were submitted by developing members.

In both the SPS and TBT committees, WTO members have dedicated considerable time to discussing specific trade concerns. This helps to highlight the increasing use of the committees by WTO members to solve trade concerns.

The Report also shows that a greater number of trade concerns, other than SPS and TBT, were raised in various WTO bodies compared to the previous Report.

This includes concerns related to quantitative restrictions, customs fees and safeguard measures.

Several of these trade concerns were also raised in more than one WTO body. This seems to confirm that these concerns involve increasingly complex and cross-cutting issues. It also helps to increase transparency, and demonstrates the value of WTO committees as constructive platforms to engage.

In the area of TRIPS, the Report shows how WTO members continued to develop their national strategies in IP. This includes streamlining intellectual property into their economic planning and modernizing their IP legislation.

The Report also notes the progress made in the implementation of the WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement, as well as the work following on from the results of MC11.

To conclude, I would like to express my thanks again to all participants in this important work. I also want to thank the Secretariat for their work in putting this report together.

I urge all members to join in and help us in strengthening this exercise.

We should welcome scrutiny and encourage transparency – they are both absolutely vital for a well-functioning trading system. They allow us to profile emerging trends and problems at an early stage.

And the message of the Report before us today is serious.

We are heading in the wrong direction, and we seem to be speeding up.

Growth, jobs and recovery are at stake – as well as the health of the trading system on which we all rely.

I call on members to recognize the gravity of this report and its findings.  We need to see immediate steps which de-escalate the situation. I will continue working with all members to this end.

Source: wto.org

 

 

188/ Improving customer satisfaction with updated ISO series of standards

We all know that retaining loyal, happy customers is the key to any successful business, but the fickle consumer world is not always easy to please. A series of guidelines has just been published, bringing together international best practice on customer satisfaction.

From handling complaints to service with a smile, taking care of customers is a science in itself and one not to be taken lightly as it can have a dramatic effect on both staff morale and the bottom line. Studies abound that show that those companies that perform well in customer experience have higher revenues and returns on investments.¹⁾ Not to mention that most customers don’t go back to a company if they have a bad experience. ¹⁾

Getting the customer experience right, then, is imperative. A series of international standards dedicated to improving customer satisfaction has just been updated, to ensure the information is most relevant and reflects revisions to ISO’s flagship standard for quality, ISO 9001.

Stan Karapetrovic, Convener of the working group that revised the standards said they guide organizations on implementing effective systems to improve customer satisfaction.

“These guidelines were revised simultaneously, aligning both with ISO 9001 and with each other,” he said.

“While each of the standards can be efficiently implemented by themselves, their integrated application is very effective as well.”

The standards are:

ISO 10001, Quality management – Customer satisfaction – Guidelines for codes of conduct for organizations

ISO 10002, Quality management – Customer satisfaction – Guidelines for complaints handling in organizations

ISO 10003, Quality management – Customer satisfaction – Guidelines for dispute resolution external to organizations

ISO 10004, Quality management – Customer satisfaction – Guidelines for monitoring and measuring

The series of standards was developed by subcommittee 3, Supporting technologies, of technical committee ISO/TC 176, Quality management and quality assurance, the secretariat of which is held by NEN, ISO’s member for the Netherlands.

They are available from your national ISO member or the ISO Store.

1) Forbes: The Customer Experience Imperative: How To Justify The Investment

Source: iso.org

 

189/ ASEAN to flourish as a single tourism destination

The annual ASEAN Tourism Forum (ATF 2019) themed “ASEAN – the Power of One” is set to take place in the northeastern city of Ha Long in Quang Ninh province from January 14-18, where measures will be discussed for the development of ASEAN into a single tourism destination.

At the 48th Meeting of ASEAN National Tourism Organisations, recently held in Brunei with the participation of 100 delegates who are leaders and officials of ASEAN national tourism organizations, the ASEAN Secretariat and international tourism organizations inside and outside ASEAN, Vice Chairman of Vietnam National Administration of Tourism Ha Van Sieu proposed a theme for the ATF 2019 as “ASEAN – the Power of One”.

Mr Sieu spoke of his appreciation for the cooperation efficiency and tourism growth of regional countries last year and into the first half of this year. The ASEAN tourism cooperation committees have launched perse activities, especially in tourism investment and promotion, such as the ASEAN Mutual Recognition Arrangement for Tourism Professionals (MRA-TP) and human resource training and sustainable development, within the framework of the ASEAN Tourism Strategic Plan 2016-2025.

He stressed the importance of setting a development orientation for ASEAN as a single destination, which will contribute to the prosperous, sustainable and comprehensive development of ASEAN in the future.

The theme of the ATF sets ASEAN cooperation on the path towards realising “One Vision, One Identity, One community”, Sieu explained, adding that it demonstrates the meaning of the common power and beauty of the 10 ASEAN countries when they cooperate, as well as the inpidual beauty of each nation towards a prosperous, sustainable and inclusive development goal.

A wide range of activities will be held as part of the forum, such as meetings of tourism ministers and the leaders of national tourism organizations, and an ATF Travel Exchange (TRAVEX). Particularly, the ASEAN Tourism Ministers’ meeting with partner countries will focus discussions on improving competitive capacity, standardization, human resource development and sustainable and inclusive tourism development.

TRAVEX is expected to draw 450 pavilions and around 1,500 visitors. It is viewed as an annual professional tourism event, which has an enormous influence on ASEAN and Asia.

The event is hopefully to provide domestic businesses with trade opportunities, connect local tourism programs and products, and enhance tourism integration, investment and trade.

This is the second time for the ATF to be held in Vietnam after the first in 2009. The forum aims to provide a platform for exchanging information and cooperation orientations, strengthening regional cooperation to ensure sustainable development of the ASEAN tourism industry towards developing the region into an attractive single destination for international visitors and accelerate the inner bloc exchange of tourists, Sieu.

Wardi Bin Haji Mohammad Alo from the Brunei Ministry of Primary Resources and Tourism said the ASEAN Tourism Strategic Plan 2016-2025 outlines that ASEAN will become a high-quality destination, bringing perse and unique experiences. Regional countries will develop their tourism in a sustainable, responsible, comprehensive and balanced manner, making significant contributions to regional socio-economic development.

The plan set forth two major orientations: improving the competitive capacity of ASEAN tourism as a single destination and ensuring sustainable and comprehensive development while promoting the training of tourism professionals. Therefore, member countries will continue to closely cooperate and implement tourism projects to obtain the best possible results, he said.

Vietnam received more than 1.6 million ASEAN tourists last year, accounting for around 13% of the total number of foreign visitors to the country. Tourists from ASEAN and other major partners such as China, the Republic of Korea, Japan, India and Russia made up 74% of the total foreign arrivals to the Southeast Asian nation.

Source: VOV

 

Tin bài 26/7

190/ Kazakhstan to host WTO’s next Ministerial Conference

WTO members have accepted Kazakhstan’s invitation to host, in Astana, the organization’s Twelfth Ministerial Conference (MC12) to be held in 2020. The decision was taken by consensus at today’s General Council meeting (26 July 2018) and marks the first time a Ministerial Conference is to be organized in Central Asia.

The conference will be held in June 2020 with exact dates to be determined. It will be attended by trade ministers and other senior officials from the organization’s 164 members.

Kazakhstan’s offer to host MC12 “demonstrates its strong belief in the multilateral trading system,” said WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo, thanking the Kazakhstan government for its invitation. “Coming from one of the newest WTO members, this is powerful,” he added.

Kazakhstan joined the WTO in 2015, and only Afghanistan and Liberia have joined more recently – in 2016.

Kazakhstan’s WTO Ambassador, Mrs Zhanar Aitzhanova, conveyed her country’s “sincere gratitude for the confidence and trust that WTO members have placed in Kazakhstan”. She added: “It is a great honour for a young independent state and recently-acceded member to be hosting such an important meeting. We stand ready to contribute to addressing all outstanding issues to secure substantive outcomes at MC12.”

The Ministerial Conference is the WTO’s top decision-making body and the Marrakesh Agreement establishing the organization instructs members to hold one at least every two years.

The previous Ministerial Conference (MC11) was held in Buenos Aires in December 2017.

Source:wto.org

 

191/ General Council: Proposed agenda

1. Report by the Chairman of the Trade Negotiations Committee and Report by the Director-General

The Chairman referred to the Director-General’s report at the 24 July Informal TNC and HODs meeting. His report was subsequently circulated in JOB/GC/195. At that meeting, the Negotiating Group Chairs also reported and 45 delegations intervened. Under this item, Uganda, Haiti (CARICOM) and Malawi (ACP) spoke.

2. Implementation of the Bali, Nairobi and Buenos Aires Outcomes — Statement by the Chairman

The Chairman reported on the work taking place in WTO regular bodies to fulfil the Bali, Nairobi and Buenos Aires Ministerial mandates. His full statement can be found in JOB/GC/196. Chad (LDCs), Sierra Leone and Tanzania spoke.

3. Work Programme on Small Economies — Report by the Chairman of the Dedicated Session of the Committee on Trade and Development

The CTD Chair reported that the Dedicated Session had met in June to continue its mandated work. The discussion — which included presentations from the Secretariat, Panama and Sri Lanka — focused on the specific challenges derived from trade costs that SVEs faced and the most important sources of merchandise and services trade costs reported by them. Guatemala (SVEs) spoke.

4. Work Programme on Electronic Commerce

The Chairs of the CTS, CTG, TRIPS Council and CTD reported on developments under the work programme on e-commerce since the last periodic review in July 2017. China informed Members about the two-week e-commerce workshop held in China. India and South Africa subsequently presented their communication in WT/GC/W/747. 28 delegations took the floor in the discussion that ensued.

5. Measures to allow Graduated LDCs, with GNP below US$1000, benefits pursuant to Annex VII(b) of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures — Communication from the Central African Republic on behalf of the LDC Group

Chad (LDCs) presented their communication in WT/GC/W/742. A discussion followed with 11 delegations taking the floor.

6. Views on China’s Trade-Disruptive Economic Model and Implications for the WTO — Submissions from the United States

The United States made a statement on “Views on China’s Trade-Disruptive Economic Model and Implications for the WTO” and presented its submissions in WT/GC/W/745 and WT/GC/W/746. China intervened and also referred to its communication in WT/GC/W/749. 11 other delegations spoke. Thereafter, the United States and China again took the floor.

7. Twelfth Session of the Ministerial Conference — Date and Venue

The General Council agreed that the Twelfth Session of the WTO Ministerial Conference would take place in Astana, Kazakhstan, in early June 2020. The agreement was reached on the understanding that the 2019 deadline in the Buenos Aires Decision on Fisheries Subsidies is upheld and that the 2019 dates relating to the two moratoria on Electronic Commerce and on TRIPS non-violation and situation complaints are also maintained.

8. Waivers under Article IX of the WTO Agreement

The General Council adopted the waiver extension on the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme for Rough Diamonds. The Council also conducted the review of four waivers pursuant to Article IX:4 of the WTO Agreement. Haiti (CARICOM), Jamaica, the United States and Canada spoke.

9. Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration – Report on the Meeting of April 2018

At the beginning of the meeting, the General Council agreed to amend the proposed agenda in relation to the item “Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration – Report on Meetings of April and June 2018″. Only paragraphs 1.1 to 1.12 of WT/BFA/172 and attachment WT/BFA/W/448 were taken up under this item. The consideration of the full documents referred to in this item (WT/BFA/172 and WT/BFA/173) was deferred to a subsequent meeting.”

10. WTO Pension Plan

The General Council took note of the WTOPP reports in WT/L/1035 and WT/L/1037.

Under “Other Business”, the United States made an intervention on “Statements of Groups of Members in Official WTO Meetings”. Argentina, Venezuela and Cuba took the floor. Costa Rica informed delegations of the creation of a new informal group of Members to discuss trade and environment issues. The Chairman announced that he would begin consultations for the vacancies on the Chairmanships of the CTE and CTE SS and that consensus was reached in appointing Ambassador Elisabeth Tichy-Fisslberger (Austria) to serve as the Chair of the Working Party on the Accession of Bhutan to the WTO and Ambassador Paik Ji-ah (Korea) to serve as the Chair of the Working Party on the Accession of Uzbekistan to the WTO. Bhutan (Observer) took the floor. The Chairman also made an announcement regarding Members and Observers in arrears.

Source:wto.org

 

192/ WTO members take up disciplines on subsidies to IUU fishing at July meetings

WTO members in the Negotiating Group on Rules exchanged views and information on disciplines to prohibit subsidies to illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing at their 24-26 July cluster of meetings on fisheries subsidies (the third such cluster this year). Members also discussed how to organize the negotiating work in September-December, with a mix of activities including technical sessions, brainstorming, text-based discussions and time for bilateral meetings among delegations.

In line with the structure of previous clusters of meetings held in May and June, the July meetings began with presentations by fisheries management experts on processes for determining IUU fishing. Members then held a thematic discussion focused on issues surrounding subsidies to IUU fishing, including special and differential treatment for developing country and least developed country (LDC) members. Members had the opportunity to use allotted time for bilateral meetings among themselves as well.

Members also continued their work to streamline various proposals relating to “transitional provisions” for the new disciplines, along with “institutional arrangements” including for review of the implementation of fisheries subsidies disciplines after entry into force. The latest version of the document containing the streamlined texts is available here.

At the concluding session of the meeting, the chair of the Negotiating Group, Ambassador Roberto Zapata Barradas (Mexico), noted delegations’ high level of engagement throughout the cluster, and the participation of a number of capital-based officials. He also pointed to the many questions and gaps that remain in the work to develop disciplines on subsidies to IUU fishing, which he hoped the work envisaged for the autumn would help to disentangle.

Source:wto.org

 

Tin bài 27/7

193/ Vietnamese exporters urged to be adaptive to US trade barriers

Although the US is deemed a promising market for exporters, it also sets very strict import regulations. For this reason, Vietnamese enterprises are urged to improve their capacity and shake hands with others to develop supply chains to make inroads into this market.

In the first half of 2018, the US continued to top Vietnam’s export markets with 21.6 billion USD as of mid-July, accounting for 19 percent of the latter’s total export revenue.

According to statistics from the Ministry of Industry and Trade, Vietnam mostly shipped seafood, textile and garments, footwear, wood and timber products, computers, electronics and parts, and agricultural products to the US. Meanwhile, Vietnam’s imports from the US included computers, electrical components, cotton, animal feed and related materials, soy beans, and machinery and equipment.

However, the US has become very tough on importers with a series of trade tactics such as anti-dumping and countervailing duties that require Vietnamese businesses to be more developed in order to gain a foothold in this market, said Tran Quoc Manh, Chairman of the Sai Gon Trade and Production Development Corporation (Sadaco).

According to Manh, wooden furniture sent to the US is one of Vietnam’s five largest foreign currency earners. The US’ orders for wooden furniture from Vietnam are considerable, with several hundred containers each month. Those looking to export to this market must be able to fulfil such large orders and produce pieces of furniture that reach a high level of finesse.

Vietnamese firms need to expand their scale and use automated production lines to satisfy these requirements, he suggested.

Other experts forecast that the US’s stricter rules on imports of seafood and agricultural products will raise costs and reduce the competitive edge of Vietnamese exporters. In the long term, to sustain access to this market, local firms must adapt themselves to such rules and strictly follow food safety regulations.

Deputy Minister of Industry and Trade Do Thang Hai warned that new changes in the US’ trade policy is likely to have major impacts on exports of many Vietnamese key items, so that it may become difficult to maintain the current shipments, let alone boost exports, to the US market.

The Ministry of Industry and Trade encourages domestic enterprises to build supply chains in order to add greater value to goods to be exported to the US, Hai said, adding that the ministry is ready to assist firms in this matter.

According to James Fatheree, head of the US Chamber of Commerce in Asia, firms from the US are turning more attention towards the Vietnamese market as it holds a number of advantages in term of demographics, high economic growth, and progress in economic reform. Notably, they highly appreciated Vietnam’s human resources development alongside its improved business climate driven by the reforms of political institutions and public administration services.

Experts proposed that the Vietnamese Government should help ease barriers for domestic businesses by cutting public administrative fees and holding trade promotion events for them.

At the same time, the Government must keep regularly updated on changes in the US’ trade policy in order to come up with proper measures to support its firms in terms of production and business strategy so as to maintain their competitive advantages in this market. Further stepping up the building of a fairer and more transparent legal system is also a must, not only to draw in more foreign investment, but also to facilitate the development of local enterprises.

Source: VNA

 

Tin bài 30/7

194/ 16 nations reach 2 more deals in RCEP talks

Sixteen economies, including Japan, China and 10 members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, concluded negotiations in two more areas covered by the envisaged Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership free trade agreement.

Negotiators from the Asia-Oceania countries struck deals on customs procedures and trade facilitation and on government procurement during their 11-day meeting in Bangkok through Friday.

Although talks have yet to be concluded on 14 more elements of the multilateral trade pact, the participating countries find it possible to effectively reach a full RCEP agreement by the end of the year as scheduled, people familiar with the matter said.

Before the latest negotiation round, the countries, also including Australia, India, New Zealand and South Korea, had reached accord on economic and technical cooperation as well as on matters related to small businesses.

Keiya Iida, deputy director general of the Foreign Ministry’s Economic Affairs Bureau, told reporters on Friday that participants exchanged views more constructively than ever during the Bangkok meeting.

The talks are “progressing steadily,” he added.

Souce: The Japan News

 

195/ WTO issues 2018 editions of its flagship statistical publications

The WTO issued today (30 July) the latest editions of its annual statistical publications: World Trade Statistical Review, Trade Profiles and World Tariff Profiles.

World Trade Statistical Review 2018 looks into the latest trends in global trade, with an in-depth analysis of what is being traded in goods and services and who the leading players are. It also looks at the performance of developing economies, the latest developments in regional trade agreements, trade in value-added terms and digital trade.

A section on trade policy developments provides data on trade-restrictive and trade-facilitating measures implemented by WTO members, commitments to the Aid for Trade initiative, and implementation of the WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement. It also looks into the latest developments in trade finance and the outcome of the 11th WTO Ministerial Conference held at the end of 2017.

Analytical chapters are complemented by over 60 tables providing a detailed breakdown of merchandise trade and trade in commercial services.

Merchandise trade data in World Trade Statistical Review are jointly produced in collaboration with the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) while commercial services data are jointly produced with UNCTAD and the International Trade Centre (ITC).

Trade Profiles 2018 provides a series of key indicators on merchandise trade and trade in commercial services for 197 economies, highlighting the breakdown of exports and imports for each economy as well as their main trading partners. For each profile, the data are presented in a handy two-page format, providing a concise overview of global trade.

World Tariff Profiles 2018, a joint publication of the WTO, ITC and UNCTAD, provides comprehensive information on the tariffs and non-tariff measures imposed by over 170 countries and customs territories. Tariff data are presented in comparative tables and in one-page profiles for each economy. Statistics on non-tariff measures by country and by product group complement the data on tariffs.

World Tariff Profiles also includes as a special topic an analysis of how least-developed countries make use of preferential tariffs offered by trading partners for their exports.

The three publications can be downloaded from the WTO website. French and Spanish editions will be available for download by the end of August. Printed copies will be available in September.

Additional data are available through the WTO’s statistical webpage, the WTO statistical database and the International Trade and Market Access online data application. A further update of merchandise exports and imports will be available online at the end of October.

The WTO also provides short-term trade data through the WTO statistics webpage.

Source:wto.org

 

Tin bài 31/7

196/ India-ASEAN FTA needs to be expanded: Vietnam envoy

The free trade agreement (FTA) between India and the 10-member ASEAN needs to be upgraded and expanded for the pact to deliver desired results, Vietnamese Ambassador to India Ton Sinh Thanh has said.

“The India-ASEAN FTA has not led to as much expansion in trade between the two countries. There is definitely a need to upgrade it and both sides are considering it. There is a need to expand the agreement to include more products,” Thanh said, speaking at an interaction with the media organised by the Indian Women’s Press Corps on Monday.

Stressing on the opportunities for an expansion in trade that existed between the two countries, Thanh said if trade was opened up, there was a possibility of bilateral trade expanding from the present $7 billion to $20 billion.

Giving an example, the Ambassador said that Vietnam imported about $10 billion of fabric for its textile industry every year. “India has the capacity of meeting our demand for textile inputs. If trade is opened up, we could be importing a lot of this item from India,” he said.

The trade deficit between India and the ASEAN has increased after the FTA in goods was implemented in 2009. According to industry figures, trade deficit has worsened account for approximately 75 per cent of India’s exports to ASEAN.

Thanh pointed out that Indian investment in Vietnam was low and there was a lot of potential for it to increase. “We know that Indian companies invested about $40 billion outside the country last year. Of that only $100-150 million was made in Vietnam. However, we do expect levels to rise as big Indian companies like Mahindra and Adani are looking for opportunities in Vietnam,” the Ambassador said.

Source: The Hindu Business Line

 

Tin bài 02/8

197/ Morocco launches safeguard investigation on coated wood board

On 27 July 2018, Morocco notified the WTO’s Committee on Safeguards that it had decided to initiate on 31 July 2018 a safeguard investigation on coated wood board.

In the notification Morocco indicated, among other things, that:

All interested persons shall have 30 days from the date of initiation of the investigation to make themselves known as interested parties, and to provide any comments concerning the investigation, to the Ministry by fax or email using the coordinates below:

Royaume du Maroc
Ministère de l’Industrie, de l’Investissement, du Commerce et de l’Economie Numérique
Direction Générale du Commerce
Direction de la Défense et de la Réglementation Commerciale
Parcelle 14, Business center, aile Nord bd Riad, Hay Riad. BP 610, Rabat Chellah, Maroc
Téléphone: +212 537.70.18.46
Télécopieur: +212 537.72.71.50
Email:  mberredouane@mcinet.gov.ma
oguendouz@mcinet.gov.ma
nnadi@mcinet.gov.ma
ramourak@mcinet.gov.ma

Further information is available in G/SG/N/6/MAR/10.

What is a safeguard investigation?

A safeguard investigation seeks to determine whether increased imports of a product are causing, or is threatening to cause, serious injury to a domestic industry.

During a safeguard investigation, importers, exporters and other interested parties may present evidence and views and respond to the presentations of other parties.

A WTO member may take a safeguard action (i.e. restrict imports of a product temporarily) only if the increased imports of the product are found to be causing, or threatening to cause, serious injury.

Source:wto.org

 

198/ The granting of Preferential Certificate of Origin will be classified from 15th August

According to the Government’s portal, from 15th August 2018, the granting of Preferential Certificate of Origin will be implemented by the channel classification method under provisions in Circular 15/2018/TT-BTC issued by the Ministry of Industry and Trade.

Green channel regime

In order to be applied the Green Channel regime in the procedure for granting preferential C/O, traders need meet the following criteria: trader was recognized as a prestigious exporter by Ministry of Industry and Trade; or was recognized as an Authorized Economic Operator in the Customs management by Ministry of Finance; Or trader satisfying the following conditions: Trader has not violated on origin regulations in the two latest years before the time of applying for the approval of Green channel regime; has full dossier archive system (paper and e-dossier) to prove the authenticity of the C/O and origin of goods within the archival time limit prescribed in the Government’s Decree No. 31/2018/ND-CP; implement the e-C/O declaration via the system for management and granting e-certificate of origin (www.ecosys.gov.vn) and have the frequency of applying at least 30 sets of preferential C/O per year.

Trader will enjoy the priority regimes when it is classified into Green Chanel including: Priority for late submission of documents, priority for the time of granting preferential C/O and priority for physical inspection of goods and manufacturing establishment.

Specifically, the time for late submission of documents shall be extended within 45 working days from the date of granting C/O for documents that are permitted for late submission as per provisions in Decree 31/2018/ND-CP. The time limit for handling for granting preferential C/O in paper form is 6 working hours after receiving legal dossier; trader is exempted from physical inspection of goods and manufacturing establishments in the application for granting preferential C/O.

Red channel regime

Commodities subject to the Red channel regime are identified by the following criteria: Commodities have high risk in origin fraud to evade trade remedies of importing country or enjoy preferential tariffs from commitments that an importing country gives to Vietnam; or commodities with the significant and irregular increase in volume of C/O subject to be investigated and verified the origin of goods under the request of importing country.

When being classified into the Red channel, trader must fully submit documents (paper and e-documents) as per provisions in Clause 1 Article 15 Decree 31/2018 /ND-CP.

The handling of dossiers for granting of preferential C/O shall be implemented within 3 working days after receiving legal paper documents in accordance with regulations.

Regarding physical inspection of goods and manufacturing establishments: Preferential C/O-granting agencies and organizations shall implement physical inspection for goods and manufacturing establishment for commodities which have applied for preferential C/O for the first time, or in the case where trader applies for granting preferential C/O, when there is suspicion of goods origin fraud.

The Circular will take effect from 15th August 2018.

Source: VCN

 

Tin bài 03/8

199/ Anchors aweigh: ISO guidelines for lifeboat safety just updated

With more people heading out to sea over summer, safety onboard – and overboard – is under the spotlight. International guidelines for the effectiveness of sea anchors for rescue boats have just been updated.

When we climb aboard any kind of boat or ship, we don’t often think of the lifeboat hanging off the side. While we hope never to use it, it is essential that it functions as intended and gets everyone to shore should the need arise.

A sea anchor is a vital component to a rescue boat, reducing the likelihood of it drifting away or spinning around, and keeps it steady in the wind. International guidelines for the performance and safety of sea anchors have just been updated to bring them in line with the International Maritime Organization’s International Life-Saving Appliance Code.

Robin Townsend, Chair of the ISO technical subcommittee that developed the standard, said ISO 17339:2018, Ships and marine technology – Life saving and fire protection – Sea anchors for survival craft and rescue boats, specifies the requirements, including details such as minimum required drag and resistance to weather.

“This standard is designed to provide manufacturers with what is required to ensure the anchors not only work effectively, but withstand the conditions in which they are stored,” he said. “It also features test methods such as for strength, towing and corrosion.”

ISO 17339 was developed by ISO technical committee ISO/TC 8, Ships and marine technology, subcommittee SC 1, Maritime safety, whose secretariat is held by ANSI, ISO’s member for the USA. It can be purchased from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

Source:iso.org

 

200/ Advanced training course for developing economies concludes at WTO

Twenty-six government officials from across the world took part in an Advanced Course on the Economic Analysis of Trade Policy at the WTO from 26 July to 3 August 2018. The course taught participants ways to carry out trade policy research, collect data and implement quantitative analysis in a more autonomous way.

The course highlighted the importance of analyzing economic data and assessing the impact of trade policy decisions at the national level and in multilateral, regional and bilateral trade negotiations. Participants became familiar with sources of data and methodologies to analyze trade and trade policy, including to estimate the impact of certain determinants on trade flows, and to calculate trade policy indicators. The course also provided a platform to discuss ways of enhancing the use of research in policy making.

The course was opened by the WTO’s Deputy Director-General Yi Xiaozhun. In his address, he said that analyzing the economic effects of trade policy quantitatively can be very useful in helping WTO members formulate efficient trade policies.

The activity is based on two joint UNCTAD/WTO publications, “A Practical Guide to Trade Policy Analysis” and “An Advanced Guide to Trade Policy Analysis“. Participants also heard from Professor Yoto Yotov of the American University Drexel about the latest advances in trade policy analysis, including a model to simulate the long-term impact of trade policy changes.

The chief of the Course Design and Training Section of the WTO’s Institute for Training and Technical Cooperation (ITTC), Raymundo Valdés, closed the course by encouraging the participants to use the tools they learned, including by sharing among their colleagues, to support well-informed policy making.

The course – designed by Marc Bacchetta, Cosimo Beverelli, Jose-Antonio Monteiro and Roberta Piermartini of the WTO’s Economic Research and Statistics Division – was delivered jointly with the ITTC and was offered as part of the WTO’s technical assistance and capacity building courses. It represents the highest level of “specialist” training within the WTO’s progressive learning framework.

List of participants:

Sonia Mabel LEON	ARGENTINA
Gaoakanye TAPENG	BOTSWANA
Helio SILVA FILHO	BRAZIL
David Andrés IBANEZ PARRA	COLOMBIA
Jose Maria MUNNE CACERES	DOMINICAN REPUBLIC
Víctor Manuel ANDRADE DIAZ	ECUADOR
Ketevan CHAPIDZE	GEORGIA
Alfred Antwi ANNOR	GHANA
Ditya Agung NURDIANTO	INDONESIA
Moawiah ABDEL RAUOF AHMAD ATIAT	JORDAN
Soraya Farah RAMJANALLY NUTHAY	MAURITIUS
Hajar EZ-ZAHER	MOROCCO
Kay KHAING KYAW	MYANMAR
Tarka Raj BHATTA	NEPAL
Walter Luis Baldovino BENITEZ MELGAREJO	PARAGUAY
Mikhail KUTKIN	RUSSIAN FEDERATION
Bali Kaur SODHI	SINGAPORE
Thembekile MLANGENI	SOUTH AFRICA
Thavishya Dakshini MULLEGAMGODA	SRI LANKA
Po-Hsuan TSAI	CHINESE TAIPEI
Mawusse Komlagan Nezan OKEY	TOGO
Kriyaa BALRAMSINGH	TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO
Ceren GUNDOGDU	TURKEY
Allan Mugarura NDAGIJE	UGANDA
José Pedro RÍOS VALDEZ	URUGUAY
Oliver KAONGA	ZAMBIA

 

Source:wto.org

 

Tin bài 06/8

 

201/ PM affirms resolve to control inflation amid big pressure on CPI

Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc has reiterated the Government’s resolve to control inflation, noting that although the consumer price index (CPI) in July fell slightly from the previous month, the pressure for inflation hike remains considerable.

The PM was chairing the Government’s monthly meeting in Hanoi on July 31 to review the socio-economic situation in July and the first seven months of 2018.

He said the socio-economic situation in July was better than in June when inflation was controlled well with the CPI down 0.09% after surging in the two previous months.

Though there remains an array of difficulties, PM Phuc asserted the Government will try to keep this year’s inflation within 4% as targeted by the National Assembly. Core inflation (CPI excluding fresh food, energy, and State-managed services such as health care and education) has just risen by 1.36% in seven months.

Stressing the need to have more measures to rein in inflation, he noted the big pressure for inflation increase as a result of higher interest rates in the world market, exchange rates and prices of essential goods, especially amid a trade war between China and the US.

Highlighting other positive economic figures, the Cabinet leader said industrial production expanded strongly by 14.3% in July, including a 16.6-percent increase in processing and manufacturing.

Other indices like retail sales of consumer goods and services, the number of international arrivals, foreign direct investment, budget revenue and exports also posted good growth. Notably, exports had approximated US$134 billion as of mid-July, leading to trade surplus of US$3.1 billion. Nearly 80,000 new businesses have been set up while 18,700 firms have resumed operations so far this year.

With encouraging socio-economic signs, many international organisations have projected good economic outlook for Vietnam, he said, noting that the Asian Development Bank forecast this year’s GDP growth rate at 7.1% while Standard Chartered predicted this figure at 7% and inflation at around 4%.

However, PM Phuc also pointed to many shortcomings along with challenges to the economy, including the complex flooding situation. He asked the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development and relevant agencies to take stronger measures to manage reservoirs and dams and study the lesson of the recent hydropower dam collapse in Laos.

Expressing his worry about the slow equitisation of State-owned enterprises, he blamed many ministries, sectors and localities for not being drastic enough and requested them to accelerate this work. He noted that the Government will hold a national conference on State-owned enterprises in the time ahead.

Regarding the national high school examination cheating in some localities, he said these scandals have greatly influenced the public trust. He demanded the whole political system and relevant agencies to deal with this problem thoroughly.

In terms of scrap import into Vietnam – another public concern, the PM said the Cabinet’s standing members had met to discuss and issue directions on this issue with the determination of not turning Vietnam into a dumping site of the world. He added that the public security sector has been assigned to investigate and launch criminal proceedings against importers abandoning imported scrap to avoid responsibility.

In its routine meeting, Government members will focus on policies and institutional building on July 31 and look into the socio-economic situation on August 1.

Source: VNA

 

Tin bài 09/8

202/ You’re hired! Finding the best for the job with new ISO guidelines

An organization’s greatest asset is its employees, but the impact that new recruits have on a company’s success is sometimes less clear. Or is it? New international guidelines have just been published that give recruiters a metric to measure just how well they have done.

When it comes to recruitment, finding the right person for the job not only fills an employment gap, it can have a significant impact on the organization as a whole. Recognizing this, HR departments are now often strategic partners within a company, so measuring the impact of their expertise not only demonstrates their value, but allows for continuous improvement as well.

Measuring the “quality of hire”, or the benefit that newly employed staff bring to a company, is therefore essential to determine the effectiveness of the recruitment process.

Recently published, ISO technical specification ISO/TS 30411:2018, Human resource management – Quality of hire metric, outlines international best practice to do just that. It identifies metrics that can be used to evaluate the link between the new person’s work and the success of the organization.

Dr Ron McKinley, Chair of the ISO technical committee that developed ISO/TS 30411, said it is a key tool for any organization, regardless of size or sector.

“Measuring how well the new employee performs, and thus how good a choice they were, is always context-based, with many contributing factors,” he said. “But this technical specification provides a concrete way of evaluating their performance against measurable targets or expectations that relate to organizational performance, thus serving as a highly useful reporting tool.”

ISO/TS 30411 was developed by ISO technical committee ISO/TC 260, Human resource management, the secretariat of which is ANSI, ISO’s member for the USA. It can be purchased from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

Source:iso.org

 

203/ Vietnam, Guinea seek to expand cooperation

Vietnam attaches importance to developing relations with African friends, including the Republic of Guinea, Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Pham Binh Minh said on August 7.

At a reception for Guinea’s Foreign Minister Mamadi Toure in Hanoi, Minh touched upon specific measures to beef up cooperation between the two countries in such areas as agriculture, telecommunications, education and health care.

He also talked about the plan to expand the bilateral collaboration in realms in which the two countries have potential like transportation, mining and oil and gas, facilitating the exchanges between the people and businesses of the two sides.

For his part, Mamadi Toure affirmed that Guinea treasures ties with Vietnam, saying he wishes that the bilateral cooperation would be expanded via the Party and National Assembly channels and people-to-people exchanges.

Political trust should serve as the foundation for economic links between Vietnam and Guinea, he said.

Host and guest consented to deepen the bilateral friendship, advance the two-way trade which is now standing at nearly 160 million USD, and encourage Vietnamese businesses to invest in Guinea.

Source: VNA

 

204/ HCM City leader pledges optimal conditions for Japanese investors

Ho Chi Minh City will create optimal conditions for Japanese firms to do long-term business in the city, said Vice Chairman of the municipal People’s Committee Le Thanh Liem.

Receiving a delegation of the Japan Chamber of Commerce and Industry (JCCI)’s Youth Commission led by its head Uchida Shigenobu on August 7, Liem lauded the visit, which, he believed, will strengthen the all-round cooperation between Ho Chi Minh City and Japan, especially in trade and investment.

Over the past years, the traditional relationship between Ho Chi Minh City and localities of Japan has been fostered through collaboration programmes in culture, economy, education and tourism, he said, adding that Japan is now the fifth largest foreign investor in the city.

Liem said that HCM City has many export processing zones, industrial parks and high-tech parks which are always ready to welcome Japanese investors.

For his part, Shigenobu said that the delegation, comprising of more than 100 delegates from more than 100 businesses, representing 34,000 JCCI member companies, aims to study the investment environment and seek partnership and investment opportunities in the city.

While appreciating the municipal authorities’ support and assistance to Japanese investors, Shigenobu stressed that Japanese firms are confident in the city’s economic development potential.

He expressed his hope to continue receiving support from HCM City to Japanese enterprises that are seeking investment and business opportunities in the city.

The JCCI’s Youth Commission will work hard to contribute to fostering economic, trade and investment between Japan and Ho Chi Minh City, thus strengthening the sound friendship and partnership between Japan and Vietnam, he promised.

Source: VNA

 

Tin bài 13/8

205/ RCEP trade ministers to meet on Aug 30-31 in Singapore

The meeting is important as the 16-member bloc now needs specific political guidance to move the negotiations further.

Trade ministers of Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) member countries, including India and China, will hold a crucial meeting in Singapore on August 30-31, an official said.

The meeting is important as the 16-member bloc now needs specific political guidance to move the negotiations further, the official added.

RCEP mega trade pact aims to cover goods, services, investments, economic and technical cooperation, competition and intellectual property rights.

RCEP bloc comprises 10 Asean members (Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, Singapore, Thailand, the Philippines, Laos and Vietnam) and their six FTA partners – India, China, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand.

The meeting also assumes significance as the member countries are not moving at a healthy pace even as the negotiation for the deal started in November 2012.

The 23rd round of the negotiation was recently concluded without much progress in Bangkok.

India is also holding comprehensive stakeholder consultations with industry as well as different ministries and departments on the pact as the grouping includes China, with which India has a huge trade deficit.

Sectors including textiles, steel and food processing have raised serious objections over removal or significant reduction of customs duties on these items under the pact. They want these segments to be out of the purview of RCEP.

They have apprehensions that removal of duties would led to flooding of Chinese goods in the Indian market. But without any free trade agreement, India has a trade deficit of $63.12 billion in 2017-18 with China as compared to $51.11 billion in the previous year.

An informal group of ministers, headed by Commerce and Industry Minister Suresh Prabhu, is also holding deliberations on the concerns of the industry.

Pressure is mounting on India for early conclusion of the negotiation despite the fact that no member is showing flexibility in its stand.

Former Commerce Secretary Rita Teaotia has recently said the mega trade deal would be incomplete if the norms to promote services sector are not sufficiently liberalised by the member countries.

RCEP members want India to eliminate or significantly reduce customs duties on maximum number of goods it traded globally. India’s huge domestic market provides immense opportunity of exports for RCEP countries.

But lower level of ambitions in services and investments, a key area of interest for India, does not augur well for the agreement that seeks to be comprehensive in nature.

Of the RCEP nations, India has trade deficit with as many as 10 countries, including China, South Korea and Australia, among others.

Some experts have warned over the impact of RCEP agreement on India’s trade.

Biswajit Dhar, a professor at Jawaharlal Nehru University is of the view that India should be very cautious about this pact.

He believes that with the kind of market access and tariff cuts RCEP countries are demanding including in agriculture sector, it would be difficult for India to sustain in the long run.

India wants certain deviations for such countries. Under deviations, India may propose a longer duration for either reduction or elimination of import duties for such countries.

Under services, India wants greater market access for its professionals in the proposed agreement.

India wants to have a balanced RECP trade agreement as it would cover 40 percent of the global GDP and over 42 percent of the world’s population.

India already has a free trade pact with Association of South East Asian Nations (Asean), Japan and South Korea. It is also negotiating a similar agreement with Australia and New Zealand but has no such plans for China.

Source: Money Control  

 

206/ Canada Bolstering for Tough Negotiating on Dairy when NAFTA talks Reopen

Canada bolstering for tough negotiating on dairy when NAFTA talks reopen as the US has incomplete business with Canada’s supply administered dairy, egg and poultry sectors if negotiations to refurbish the North American Free Trade Agreement takes its final steps this fall.

U.S. farmers could have traded more of their products into Canada under the Trans-Pacific pact, an undertaking between 12 Pacific Rim countries arranged during the Obama administration.  However, President Donald Trump dragged the US out of the negotiation in his first week in office.

Now he is out to retrieve himself at the NAFTA convene after implementing formerly inconceivable tariffs on steel and aluminum and forbidding executing the similar things to cars. Bob Wolfe, a professor emeritus at Queen’s University who has studied agriculture trade policy since the 80s said that Canada understood that venturing into TPP that the amount for entry was to do something on dairy. Everyone in Canada in the United States Trade Representative’s office knew that Canada backed out on supply management earlier and will back out again. Provided CPTPP, has an engaging idea what Canadian back out will look like.

Under the CPTPP — the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, the redesigned description of  the TPP being certified by the enduring  11 countries, Canada generates 20 contemporary tariff rate quotas permitting finite quantities of dairy, poultry and egg imports, to be carried out in over 11 to 19 years. They are around 3.25 per cent of Canada’s market.

Canada bolstering for tough negotiating on dairy when NAFTA talks reopen. In CPTPP discussions now advancing, farms and businesses can elucidate how they will be determined by the quota alterations and state and what government assistance they will require to adapt.

Source: Serie A Weekly

 

Tin bài 15/8

207/ Registration opens for screening of “US — Softwood Lumber Pricing Methodology” hearing

At the request of the parties in the dispute “US — Anti-Dumping Measures Applying Differential Pricing Methodology to Softwood Lumber from Canada” (DS534), the panel has decided to open its first substantive meeting to public observation on 12 and 13 September 2018. The live screening will take place at the WTO’s headquarters in Geneva.

The meeting with the parties is scheduled to start at 10.00 on 12 September 2018 and may continue until 17.00. It will resume on 13 September 2018, if necessary, after the third party session. The meeting may be closed at the times to be determined by the panel in order to discuss confidential information, if necessary.

The third party session is scheduled to start at 10.00 on Thursday, 13 September 2018. The panel will open to public observation the statements/interventions of third parties that agreed to present their statements/interventions publicly. The rest of the third party session will not be opened to public observation.

The panel reserves the right to close the meeting to public observation at any time, on its own initiative or at the request of either party, if there is a risk of breach of confidentiality or of disruption of the meeting.

The meeting will be held in English only; interpretation will not be available at the public viewing.

To register, please complete the application form. Completed forms must be sent as an email attachment to openmeetingds534@wto.org. Applications will be accepted until 17.00, Geneva time, on 31 August 2018. Those who have successfully registered will be informed by a confirmation email by 4 September 2018.

Please note that the names of registered attendees may be communicated to the parties, United States and Canada, at their request. Places in the viewing room will be allocated on a first-come first-served basis.

All registered individuals will need to present a valid identification document (passport, driver’s license, etc.) on-site to gain access to the viewing room.

Please note that any form of recording or filming is strictly prohibited. Cell phones must be switched off during the meetings.

The WTO cannot offer any support, including financial, for accommodation, flight arrangements and visas.

Source:wto.org

208/ India Can’t Turn Its Back on Free Trade

(Bloomberg Opinion) — India’s state is a mirror of its noisy, messy democracy. It’s often hard to achieve even a modest internal consensus between government departments in New Delhi: Right now, the heads of several ministries are scrambling to find a common position on the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, or RCEP — a giant trade deal that stitches together India, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, Oceania, China, Japan and Korea. At the end of August, ministers from the 16 RCEP countries will meet in Singapore; India needs to work out a constructive stand by then. There’s a very real chance that, if New Delhi’s negotiators continue to be obstructionist, the other 15 countries will move ahead without India.

For many here, that wouldn’t be a tragedy. And, frankly, even free-traders like myself see their point. India’s goods trade deficit with China appears unsustainable: It was $63 billion in 2017-18, up from $51 billion in the previous financial year and $16 billion ten years ago. That’s 60 percent of India’s overall trade deficit. As far as Indian policymakers are concerned, much of what’s being imported is sub-standard or otherwise fair game for anti-dumping legislation. China’s the main target of Indian anti-dumping action, with 214 separate investigations opened — and, even so, Indian legislators are worried that the measures are ineffective.

India can also justly complain that the RCEP’s focus on reducing goods tariffs misses the point. First of all, services trade should be opened up simultaneously; greater freedom of movement for professionals — a major source of foreign currency for India, through remittances — must be part of that. Secondly, the real constraints on the growth of trade now are “behind the border” — non-tariff barriers of one sort or another that, for example, make competing in the Chinese domestic market such a nightmare.

Less justly, specific Indian sectors are panicked about competition. Steel — which is slowly recovering after years of pummeling thanks to Chinese overcapacity — is one of them. Dairy producers obsess about Australia and New Zealand. Manufacturers worry about everyone.

But the validity (or otherwise) of Indian concerns is beside the point. The problem is that, at the moment, RCEP is the only game in town — and New Delhi runs the risk of being left on the sidelines. If India doesn’t have a more positive, forward-looking approach ready by the end of the month, then it must also abandon its ambition to infiltrate global supply chains. And that would be a disaster for a country that will shortly have both the world’s largest workforce and a mere a two-percent share of world trade.

How can India move forward? Most importantly, it mustn’t let China run away with the initiative. India is hardly the only country concerned about China’s overcapacity and its ability to dump goods wherever it pleases. A regional trade agreement that prevents countries from bringing fair, transparent and temporary anti-dumping actions is in nobody’s interest — a point India needs to make to countries like Japan.

China has cleverly used regional and bilateral trade agreements to short-cut the World Trade Organization — just as the U.S. has in the past. RCEP shouldn’t be one of them. If and only if the deal begins to build a new and equitable architecture for trade in Asia and the Pacific does it deserve to succeed.

At the same time, India can’t afford to be the villain of the piece. The signalling would be awful; most observers would see such a move as the final culmination of a turn away from the world under the current government. India has raised tariffs on 400 products over the past two years, which officials concede is a major departure from a generation-long trend towards greater openness. It has unilaterally scrapped investor protection treaties with almost 60 countries. Even the government’s choice of economic policy advisers reflects a new distrust of the world. The American-educated economists who defined the Modi government’s initial years have been eased out, not entirely gracefully.

The government believes, perhaps, that India’s fragile status as the only mildly bright spot amid collapsing emerging markets means that it doesn’t need anything from the rest of the world. This is absurd. In fact, India needs more than ever. Investors are interested in India only because they think they can make money here. And they will make money only if Indians are more productive and have more to spend.

An India that retreats from the turnpike of world trade to the dirt road of autarky — to borrow a metaphor from one of those American-educated economists who’s been eased out of government — is one that will be poorer in both the medium- and long-term. If the government wants to reassure the world that India isn’t willing to put up with the dirt road, then it needs to find a way to be more positive about RCEP.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.

Mihir Sharma is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. He was a columnist for the Indian Express and the Business Standard, and he is the author of “Restart: The Last Chance for the Indian Economy.”

Source: Bloomberg

 

 

 

 

Tin bài 16/8

209/ China initiates dispute complaints against US solar cell duties, renewable energy measures

China has requested WTO dispute consultations with the United States regarding US safeguard duties imposed on imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic products. China has also requested WTO dispute consultations with the United States regarding measures at the state and municipal level that provide incentives for the use of domestically sourced renewable energy products and technologies. The two requests were circulated to WTO members on 16 August.

China claims that the safeguard measure on solar cells is inconsistent with a number of provisions of the WTO’s Agreement on Safeguards and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994, while China claims the incentive measures for renewable energy are inconsistent with provisions under the Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs) and the GATT 1994.

Further information is available in document WT/DS562/1 and WT/DS563/1

What is a request for consultations?

The request for consultations formally initiates a dispute in the WTO. Consultations give the parties an opportunity to discuss the matter and to find a satisfactory solution without proceeding further with litigation. After 60 days, if consultations have failed to resolve the dispute, the complainant may request adjudication by a panel.

• More on consultations
• Current status of disputes

Source:wto.org

 

210/ Ready for lift-off: first international guidelines for small spacecraft just published

Space is all the rage, so it seems. The number of small spacecraft – including satellites – being manufactured has rocketed in recent years, and future forecasts are equally explosive. The first-ever internationally agreed requirements have just been published, enabling the industry to cruise even higher.

The small satellites industry is taking off. According to a recent report by SpaceWorks¹⁾, an aerospace company focused on delivering cutting-edge flight and space technologies, 2017 showed a 205 % increase in small satellite launches compared to 2016, with a record number still awaiting launch. What’s more, forecasts for future spacecraft production, often by new entrants to the industry, look equally celestial.

But producing these spacecraft involves some very specific requirements that newcomers to the market may not be aware of. To help harmonize the sector, ISO has just published the first-ever international technical specification for small spacecraft, which states the minimum requirements that every small spacecraft needs to comply with regardless of its mission.

Bringing together international expertise, ISO/TS 20991, Space systems – Requirements for small spacecraft, details the requirements for various stages of the small spacecraft system life-cycle.

Paul Gill, Chair of the ISO technical subcommittee that developed the document, said that up to 2 600 small spacecraft are estimated to launch over the next five years, many of them made by new operators.

“ISO/TS 20991 will be of great benefit to small spacecraft developers, as well as launch operators, by providing the minimum requirements to ensure their safety and debris mitigation,” he explained.

“It covers everything from the design, launch, deployment, operation and disposal, which will also give newcomers to the industry a means to access space, typically the domain of large companies and governments.”

ISO/TS 20991 was developed by ISO technical committee ISO/TC 20, Aircraft and space vehicles, subcommittee SC 14, Space systems and operations, whose secretariat is held by ANSI, ISO’s member for the USA. It is available for purchase from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

Source:iso.org

211/ Hanoi will endorse America’s Indo-Pacific push, but ‘in a low-key manner’, predicts Singapore-based researcher

Vietnam is likely to support the United States’ Free and Open Indo-Pacific (FOIP) strategy, but “in a low-key manner”, according to an academic at the Iseas-Yusof Ishak Institute.

Le Hong Hiep, a fellow at the state think-tank, has called the American strategy “largely compatible with Vietnam’s national interests”.

But Hanoi’s response to the policy has been “rather muted”, Dr Hiep said in a report on Vietnam’s perspective of the FOIP strategy.

“As the policy is still in its formative stage and is seen by many observers as a tool for the US to ‘contain’ China, it is not in Hanoi’s interest to make a public statement on it,” he wrote.

“Moreover, Vietnamese mainstream strategists and foreign policymakers may not have arrived at a common understanding of the policy yet. Anecdotal evidence suggests that internal debates on the policy may be underway, and there seems to be different views on how Vietnam should respond to it.”

But Dr Hiep also noted that economic aspects of the FOIP strategy – such as its goals of open logistics, open investment, and free, fair, and reciprocal trade – “also sit well with Vietnam’s overall foreign policy”, given Vietnam’s status as a developing market “that heavily relies on foreign trade and investment and seeks to upgrade its infrastructure systems”.

“Like most regional countries, Vietnam is adopting a ‘wait and see’ attitude and its future reactions to the strategy will depend on its own strategic calculations as well as the actual evolution of the strategy, which remains unclear at the moment,” he said.

He concluded that “Vietnam should be expected to endorse the FOIP policy, albeit not necessarily publicly”.

“Diplomatically, Vietnam may work with like-minded partners to insert references to key elements of the strategy into bilateral joint statements or joint communiqués of international meetings.

“Operationally, Vietnam is likely to continue deepening its strategic cooperation with the major powers, especially members of the Quad, to enhance collaborative security in the region and strengthen its bargaining position vis-à-vis China,” Dr Hiep added, referring to a group of four countries: the US, Japan, Australia and India.

He also remarked that the success of the FOIP policy “will mainly be determined by the US itself”.

Besides a coherent strategic vision and clarity on expectations for interested regional countries’ roles in the strategy, “any attempt by Washington to impose its will on regional countries, even in the name of an open and free rules-based regional order, will most likely be counter-productive”, Dr Hiep warned

Source: Business Times

 

Tin bài 20/8

212/ Pressure mounting to ratify CPTPP

Recently, Singapore became the third nation to ratify the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) after Mexico and Japan.

Malaysia’s future in the agreement, however, continues to hang in the balance. Malaysia’s participation in CPTPP is a hot-button issue.

It cuts across all pillars of national interests, but missed the firing squad in the run-up to the May 9 general election.

Now that the dust has settled, what better time than now to restart the discussion on this controversial topic?

Judging from the manifesto by both coalitions, it seems rather “awkward” for the previous administration to follow through with the ratification of CPTPP.

On the one hand, Barisan Nasional (BN) propagated continuity, in particular with respect to leadership, affirmative policy and governance.

Pakatan Harapan (PH ) , on the o t her h and, promised continuous reform agenda with progressive and democratic development ideas.

This author argues that CPTPP is more in line with PH’s philosophy as the agreement represents a wholesale of policy changes that go deep into existing policies.

Let’s start with the Buku Harapan. Janji #23, for example, highlights PH’s intention to review government procurement and tender procurement practices.

This is in line with CPTPP’s procurement disciplines and threshold for goods and services that will essentially disrupt the status quo of present participants. It also encourages a more equitable and efficient allocation of preferences.

More importantly, strict transparency rules will limit the window for corruption as all information relating to “covered procurement” are required to be publicly accessible.

In fact, Malaysia may even graduate from the observer status in the WTO’s Government Procurement Agreement to become a full member following the ratification of CPTPP.

Presently, there is no specific law to govern state-owned enterprises (SOEs) in Malaysia.

Despite the recent brouhaha on key appointments at Khazanah Nasional, political interference in the day-today administration of SOEs can be minimal.

CPTPP will ensure that SOEs conform to stringent trade disciplines in the domestic and in members’ markets.

Malaysia will need to introduce an act to harmonise governance and transparency requirements of SOEs that is in consonance with international standards, and as enshrined under Janji #22 of the Buku Harapan.

CPTPP promises high-quality labour rights that is based on the four principles outlined in the International Labour Organisation Declaration 1998.

Janji #35 of the Buku Harapan promulgates the strengthening of workers rights and providing more freedom for workers to demand for their basic rights, mirroring much of CPTPP’s labour disciplines.

This will ensure that the benefits of trade leads to a higher real wage growth in addressing today’s rising cost of living.

Speaking of which, Janji #2 of the Buku Harapan promises lower prices of daily necessities. Once Malaysia ratifies CPTPP, almost 85 per cent of goods will face zero import tariffs following the agreement’s entry into force on many essential food items, such as flour, fish, meat of bovine animals, vegetables and sugar.

All of these promises point towards one direction: good governance.

It goes without saying that CPTPP and the Buku Harapan go hand in hand in promoting policy clarity and predictability while strengthening coordination among government agencies in reducing duplication and redundancy.

Issues such as open tender and dissemination of approved permits for motor vehicles, for example, are required to be fully accessible by the public.

Suffice to say, there is enough internal pressure on the present administration to proceed with ratification knowing that the opposition will demand PH to honour many, if not all, of its election promises.

Furthermore, it is in PH’s interest to push its limits for reforms by ticking as many boxes as they possibly can in order to present themselves as a credible alternative to BN.

In the event that PH fails to fully deliver its 100-day pledge, this could be the next best thing. If internal pressure is not enough, the political and economic dynamics surrounding world trade will push Malaysia to thoroughly consider ratifying the agreement.

That said, it is equally important to consider Malaysia’s future in the CPTPP from the external perspective as well.

As it stands, Vietnam is happily cruising to become “the first six”, thus harnessing its first mover advantage ahead of Malaysia.

Once the National Assembly passes all necessary papers, which is highly probable, Vietnam is in a much comfortable position to take advantage of the on-going trade war between the United States and China.

Although both countries are not members of the CPTPP, investor confidence will surely move in Vietnam’s favour.

As a result, trade and investment diversion prospects due to CPTPP are not theoretical after all.

As a fully ratified member of CPTPP, Vietnam will have exclusive rights to discuss accession process with aspirant economies of great economic interest to Malaysia, namely South Korea and Britain.

Malaysia will be on the outside looking in, with envy. The prospect of Thailand and Indonesia joining the pact will only raise the temperature higher, not lower.

It took our negotiators blood, sweat and tears (not literally) to reach to this point. Let us not let it go to waste.

Source: New Straits Times

213/ Turkey initiates WTO dispute complaint against additional US duties on steel, aluminium

Turkey has requested WTO dispute consultations with the United States concerning additional import duties imposed by the United States on steel and aluminium products. The request was circulated to WTO members on 20 August.

Turkey claims that the measures are inconsistent with a number of provisions of the WTO’s Agreement on Safeguards and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994.

Further information is available in document WT/DS564/1.

What is a request for consultations?

The request for consultations formally initiates a dispute in the WTO. Consultations give the parties an opportunity to discuss the matter and to find a satisfactory solution without proceeding further with litigation. After 60 days, if consultations have failed to resolve the dispute, the complainant may request adjudication by a panel.

• More on consultations
• Current status of disputes

Source:wto.org

 

214/ DG Azevêdo pays tribute to Kofi Annan

WTO Director General Roberto Azevêdo paid tribute to former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who passed away on 18 August.

“I am deeply saddened to hear about the loss of Kofi Annan,” DG Azevêdo said.  “He was a great leader and a great human being. His ideas and values must be treasured.”

Statements from Kofi Annan were delivered to a series of WTO meetings during his tenure as UN Secretary-General.

Kofi Annan’s statement to the WTO’s Second Ministerial Conference, Geneva 1998

Kofi Annan’s statement to the WTO’’s Fourth Ministerial Conference, Doha, 2001

Kofi Annan’s statement to the WTO’’s Fifth Ministerial Conference, Cancún 2003

Kofi Annan’s statement to the WTO’’s Sixth Ministerial Conference, Hong Kong 2005

Source:wto.org

 

Tin bài 21/8

215/ ISO 50001 for energy management gets a boost

Reducing energy consumption and improving energy efficiency are at the forefront of the global climate change agenda. ISO 50001, the flagship International Standard for improving energy performance, has just been updated.

Energy consumption is on the rise, despite the fact that it contributes to nearly 60 % of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions.¹⁾ At the same time, more than one billion people still lack access to electricity and many more rely on harmful, polluting energy sources.²⁾  It is no surprise, then, that addressing energy efficiency and climate change challenges make up a key part of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals in the United Nations 2030 Agenda.

ISO 50001:2018, Energy management systems – Requirements with guidance for use, transformed the energy performance of organizations worldwide when it was first published in 2011, giving them a strategic tool to use their energy more efficiently and effectively. It provides a framework for managing energy performance and addressing energy costs, while helping companies reduce their environmental impact to meet emissions reduction targets.

ISO 50001 has just been revised, making it even more effective to tackle the world’s energy challenges. Roland Risser, Chair of the ISO technical committee that developed the standard, said the new version features updated terms and definitions and greater clarification of certain energy performance concepts.

“There is a stronger emphasis on the role of top management as well, as it is important to instilling an organizational culture change,” he explained. “It is also now aligned with ISO’s requirements for management system standards, making it easier to integrate into an organization’s existing management systems.”

ISO 50001 has become increasingly important since its release seven years ago. A total of 20 216 certificates to ISO 50001 were issued by the end of 2016, according to the ISO Survey, which reveals that certifications to the standard increased by 69 % during that year. ISO 50001:2018 was developed by ISO technical committee ISO/TC 301, Energy management and energy savings, whose secretariat is held jointly by ANSI, ISO’s member for the USA, and SAC, ISO’s member for China. It can be purchased from your national ISO member or through the ISO Store.

Source:iso.org

 

Tin bài 22/8

216/ Reducing carbon footprint made easier with new International Standard

We are all suffocating in the heat of global warming, as the recent European heatwave lays testament to – and it may soon become the norm. A study showed that if greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise as they do, by 2100 74 % of the world’s population will be exposed to deadly heatwaves.¹⁾ The only solution is to reduce our carbon footprint, but first we need to measure it. An internationally agreed ISO standard for quantifying the carbon footprint of products has just been published.

According to the Global Footprint Network, an international non-profit research organization offering insights and metrics to advance sustainability, we are falling into ecological debt, and if we keep consuming the earth’s resources at the current rate, we will soon need the equivalent of 1.7 earths to survive.²⁾

Rising greenhouse gas emissions – mostly caused by our rabid consumption – have resulted in the climate chaos and consequent food and water supply disruption we see now. But much can be done to reverse this, by reducing our carbon footprint.

ISO 14067:2018, Greenhouse gases – Carbon footprint of products – Requirements and guidelines for quantification, has just been published as an International Standard, providing globally agreed principles, requirements and guidelines for the quantification and reporting of the carbon footprint of a product (CFP). It will give organizations of all kinds a means to calculate the carbon footprint of their products and provide a better understanding of ways in which they can reduce it.

ISO 14067:2018 replaces technical specification ISO/TS 14067:2013, which was upgraded to International Standard status after the market signalled a need for a more in-depth document.

Daniele Pernigotti, Convenor of the working group that developed the standard, said measuring the CFP is considered by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change as a key way of contributing to the achievement of international climate action goals.

“It allows organizations to more accurately see where the main impacts on their carbon footprint are generated related to the production of their products, and thus take appropriate actions to reduce it,” he said.

“For example, if it is related to raw materials, they can investigate using others, or if it is related to transport, they can look at improvements to their logistics model or investigate suppliers or distributors closer to home.”

Key changes from the technical specification include greater focus on quantification, moving other topics such as communication to standards in the ISO 14000 environmental management family; greater clarity on a range of aspects such as calculating the use of electricity; and the introduction of specific guidance for agricultural and forestry products.

ISO 14067 is part of the ISO 14060 family of standards for quantifying, monitoring, reporting and validating greenhouse gas emissions to support a low-carbon economy.

The standard was developed by working group WG 8 of ISO technical committee ISO/TC 207, Environmental management, subcommittee SC 7, Greenhouse gas management and related activities, the secretariat of which is held jointly by SCC, ISO’s member for Canada, and SAC, ISO’s member for China. It can be purchased from your national ISO member or though the ISO Store.

Source:iso.org

 

Tin bài 23/8

217/ Ukraine files appeal against WTO panel ruling on anti-dumping measures on ammonium nitrate

Ukraine filed an appeal on 23 August against a WTO panel report in the case brought by the Russian Federation in “Ukraine — Anti-Dumping Measures on Ammonium Nitrate” (DS493). The panel circulated its report on 20 July 2018.

Further information will be available within the next few days in document WT/DS493/6

Parties to a dispute can appeal a panel’s ruling. Appeals have to be based on points of law, such as legal interpretation — they cannot re-open factual findings made by the panel. Each appeal is heard by three members of a permanent seven-member Appellate Body comprising persons of recognized authority and unaffiliated with any government. The Appellate Body membership broadly represents the geographic range of WTO membership, with each member appointed for a fixed term. Generally, the Appellate Body has up to 3 months to conclude its report.

Source:wto.org

 

218/ The Dominican Republic files appeal against WTO panel ruling on tobacco plain packaging requirements

23 August 2018

The Dominican Republic filed an appeal on 23 August against a WTO panel report in the case brought by Honduras, the Dominican Republic, Cuba and Indonesia in “Australia — Certain Measures Concerning Trademarks, Geographical Indications and Other Plain Packaging Requirements Applicable to Tobacco Products and Packaging” (DS441). The panel circulated its report on 28 June 2018.

Further information will be available within the next few days in document WT/DS441/23

Parties to a dispute can appeal a panel’s ruling. Appeals have to be based on points of law, such as legal interpretation — they cannot re-open factual findings made by the panel. Each appeal is heard by three members of a permanent seven-member Appellate Body comprising persons of recognized authority and unaffiliated with any government. The Appellate Body membership broadly represents the geographic range of WTO membership, with each member appointed for a fixed term. Generally, the Appellate Body has up to 3 months to conclude its report.

Source:wto.org

 

Tin bài 27/8

219/ Ukraine files appeal in dispute with Russia over railway equipment import restrictions

Ukraine filed an appeal on 27 August concerning the WTO panel report in the case brought by Ukraine in “Russia — Measures Affecting the Importation of Railway Equipment and Parts thereof” (DS499). The panel circulated its report on 30 July 2018.

Further information will be available within the next few days in document WT/DS499/6

Parties to a dispute can appeal a panel’s ruling. Appeals have to be based on points of law, such as legal interpretation — they cannot re-open factual findings made by the panel. Each appeal is heard by three members of a permanent seven-member Appellate Body comprising persons of recognized authority and unaffiliated with any government. The Appellate Body membership broadly represents the geographic range of WTO membership, with each member appointed for a fixed term. Generally, the Appellate Body has up to 3 months to conclude its report.

Source:wto.org

 

220/ United States files appeal in dispute with Canada over US paper duties

The United States filed an appeal on 27 August concerning the WTO panel report in the case brought by Canada in “United States — Countervailing Measures on Supercalendered Paper from Canada” (DS505). The panel circulated its report on 5 July 2018.

Further information will be available within the next few days in document WT/DS505/6

Parties to a dispute can appeal a panel’s ruling. Appeals have to be based on points of law, such as legal interpretation — they cannot re-open factual findings made by the panel. Each appeal is heard by three members of a permanent seven-member Appellate Body comprising persons of recognized authority and unaffiliated with any government. The Appellate Body membership broadly represents the geographic range of WTO membership, with each member appointed for a fixed term. Generally, the Appellate Body has up to 3 months to conclude its report.

Source:wto.org

 

221/ China initiates WTO dispute complaint against additional US tariffs on Chinese imports

China has requested WTO dispute consultations with the United States concerning additional duties applied by the United States on imports of Chinese goods. The request was circulated to WTO members on 27 August.

China claims that the additional tariffs, applied to $16 billion in annual Chinese imports, are inconsistent with the provisions of the WTO’s General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT 1994) in that they apply solely to products of Chinese origin and exceed the United States’ bound duty rates.

Further information is available in document WT/DS565/1

What is a request for consultations?

The request for consultations formally initiates a dispute in the WTO. Consultations give the parties an opportunity to discuss the matter and to find a satisfactory solution without proceeding further with litigation. After 60 days, if consultations have failed to resolve the dispute, the complainant may request adjudication by a panel.

• More on consultations
• Current status of disputes

Source:wto.org

 

222/ FDA plans to use ISO 13485 for medical devices regulation

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the government department that regulates the medical devices sector, announced its intention to use ISO 13485 as the basis for its quality system legislation.

ISO 13485, Medical devices — Quality management systems — Requirements for regulatory purposes, is the International Standard for quality management systems for the medical devices sector. Published in 2016, it is designed to work with other management systems in a way that is efficient and transparent. The standard, which is now in its third edition, received strong support from the FDA, in line with its drive for global convergence of medical device regulatory processes.

The announcement by the FDA that it will use ISO 13485 in replacing its current quality system regulation, is an important next step in the recognition this standard has already gained globally.

ISO/TC 210 warmly welcomes the FDA’s planned adoption. This ISO technical committee, responsible for the quality management and corresponding general aspects for medical devices, is run by ANSI, ISO’s member in the United States.

Wil Vargas of the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI), and Secretary of ISO/TC 210, said “this announcement will take global harmonization of regulatory requirements in the medical devices sector to a next level”. The committee Chair, Peter Linders, added that “this bold step by the FDA seems logical, considering the role of ISO 13485 as the foundation for the Medical Devices Single Audit Program (MDSAP), currently operated by Australia, Brazil, Canada, Japan and the USA”.

Source:iso.org

 

223/ India allays exit fears, to remain engaged in RCEP

New Delhi: Allaying fears that India may exit trade talks under the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) to avoid giving more market access to China, an informal group of ministers (GoM) headed by trade minister Suresh Prabhu has decided that India will remain engaged in the 16-member trade grouping.

India will however inform at the upcoming Singapore Ministerial of the RCEP that it can’t offer tariff liberalization above 86% of traded goods to all member countries, a top government official said on condition of anonymity.

RCEP is a proposed trade pact between 10 Asean countries and their six FTA partners, namely Australia, China, India, Japan, Korea and New Zealand. It comprises 25% of global GDP, 30% of global trade, 26% of foreign direct investment flows and 45% of the total population.

The GoM was set up earlier this month to finalize India’s strategy for RCEP in view of growing opposition to the trade deal from within and outside the government. It includes power minister Piyush Goyal, defence minister Nirmala Sitharaman and housing and urban affairs minister Hardeep Puri.

“We will affirm that any tariff liberalization beyond 86% needs to be discussed and finalized bilaterally between two RCEP member countries,” said the government official, aware of the RCEP negotiations.

The Singapore Ministerial of RCEP is scheduled for 30 and 31 August.

India does not expect the negotiations to conclude by December as proposed by many RCEP members due to many unresolved issues, the official said. “Even the modalities of negotiations are yet to be finalized,” he added.

India has held bilateral talks with China, Australia and New Zealand on RCEP tariff liberalization and is expected to hold more rounds of talks with these nations.

So far, India has agreed to offer tariff liberalization on up to 86% of goods to Asean, Japan and South Korea with whom it already has free trade agreements (FTAs). However, for countries such as China, Australia and New Zealand with whom India does not have FTAs, it is ready to offer tariff liberalization on 74% of traded goods.

Several RCEP members want India to allow 92% of traded goods, but are averse to allow Indian skilled professionals greater access to their markets.

Earlier in August, Observer Research Foundation argued that a more holistic cost-benefit analysis is needed to know the potential impact of RCEP. “Till India properly comprehends the potential benefits, costs, and the associated threats including the geostrategic concerns, it should refrain from signing the RCEP,” it added.

There has been a growing clamour in the Indian industry as well as the government to exit RCEP.

V.K. Saraswat, a member of government think tank NITI Aayog, said in April that India needs to rethink joining the RCEP as it will be “disastrous” to provide more market access to China, which is a key player in the grouping.

In an interview to Mint in February this year, then chief economic adviser in the finance ministry, Arvind Subramanian, too, had said that India needs to be extra cautious and take into account geostrategic issues while moving ahead with the RCEP deal, as it would mean opening up the market to China.

Former foreign secretary S. Jaishankar, at a presentation before the parliamentary standing committee on commerce, had called for “observance of due restraint” and warned against concluding trade arrangements that are not in India’s medium-term interest.

Source: Live Mint

 

224/ CPTPP debate picks up steam as deadline looms

KUALA LUMPUR: With less than six months left to the February 2019 “deadline” and with a new government in place, the debate on whether Malaysia should ratify the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) is picking up steam.

It appears that at least a couple of domestic regulations have been modified in order to align Malaysia’s regulatory environment with those stipulated under the trade agreement.

According to Deputy Minister of International Trade and Industry (Miti) Dr Ong Kian Ming, 17 laws remain to be amended or introduced, two down from the 19 announced by former minister of international trade and ministry Datuk Seri Mustapa Mohamed in March this year.

“Ministers in some of the key ministries have been briefed with regard to the costs and benefits of the CPTPP. These are the ministries which have to pass the legislative changes as part of the process of ratifying the agreement,” Ong told The Edge Financial Daily in an email exchange.

It was earlier announced that the laws to be amended included those on issues of labour, environment and international property.

In the briefing, the costs and benefits have been updated following the US decision to pull out from the original TPP, Ong shared.

The CPTPP requires six of its 11 signatories to ratify the agreement before it can come into force, which has been targeted for early next year. But members can still ratify the agreement and participate in the deal after the deadline has passed.

So far, only Japan, Singapore and Mexico have ratified the agreement. Other signatories, besides Malaysia, are Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Chile, Peru, Vietnam and Brunei.

With 22 provisions of the original TPP agreement having been suspended by the 11 signatory nations before it was rebranded CPTPP, experts and industry players are still disputing whether or not the new deal is detrimental to Malaysia’s economy and civil society as a whole.

Benefits are still positive

“Although we were looking at several big issues, the main reason we signed the TPP was because it was supposed to give us more access to the US market,” said Wong Chen, member of parliament for Subang who was also on the parliamentary caucus for the TPP.

Now that access to the US market is no longer on the table, the resulting contribution to Malaysia’s gross domestic product (GDP) growth is less than 1% and therefore negligible, he told The Edge Financial Daily over the phone.

A December 2015 PricewaterhouseCoopers report commissioned by Miti showed that Malaysia’s GDP stood to grow between 0.6 percentage points (ppts) to 1.15ppts from the TPP.

Although Ong acknowledged that the overall trade and economic benefits of the CPTPP are reduced compared to the TPP, he argued that the benefits are still positive because of the market access Malaysia has to new potential trading partners.

“(There are) three new countries which Malaysia currently does not have any free trade agreements with, namely Canada, Mexico and Peru, which are the 10th, 15th and 48th largest economies in the world respectively,” Ong said.

A Moody’s Investor Services report dated March 9, 2018 also highlighted these nations, adding that Malaysia’s palm oil, rubber and electronics exporters will be among the beneficiaries of the CPTPP.

“Tariff concessions under [the] CPTPP will give Malaysian exporters a competitive edge over non-CPTPP countries like China,” said Adli Amirullah, economist at the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs.

On top of that, Adli argues that Malaysian manufacturers can benefit from an increased range of high-quality inputs, especially from Japan and Mexico.

“[The] CPTPP invites foreign exporters to exert competitive pressure on local manufacturers. Thus, consumers can expect to benefit from a decrease in prices and increase in quality of products,” he said.

Referring to the same report by Moody’s, Adli highlighted that Malaysia was found to gain the highest real income effects of the CPTPP among participating countries, with real income to rise by 3.1% or US$21 billion by 2030.

As such, the diversion of trade away from Malaysia and toward the CPTPP block is a “very relevant concern” if Malaysia does not sign the agreement due to the lower or near-zero tariffs levied on participating countries, he said.

“Countries like Vietnam, who already enjoyed lower labour costs, may even become more attractive to import from compared to Malaysia,” Adli pointed out.

But not everyone agrees

“The argument [by proponents of the CPTPP] is that we will be left out of future trade discussions if we don’t participate, but that’s not true. Countries will still trade with us if the government is confident (in running) things properly,” Wong said.

Professor Jomo Kwame Sundaram, a member of the prime minister’s Council of Eminent Persons who recently called for Malaysia to “withdraw gracefully” from the trade deal, pointed out additional risks to participating in the agreement.

“The CPTPP has committed Malaysia to further trade liberalisation, accelerating deindustrialisation, besides constraining the growth of modern services, development finance and ‘policy space’,” he wrote in an opinion piece.

Intellectual property rights still contentious

Even if there are real gains to be made in terms of trade and economic growth, there is the question of whether this may come at the expense of unfavourable changes to Malaysia’s regulatory sovereignty.

“The investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions will limit the rights of the people and elected representatives on all matters if these rights conflict with the financial interests of foreign corporations,” said Wong.

That said, several of the suspended provisions concern the heavily contended ISDS mechanism.

“The application of investment agreements and investment authorisations under the scope of ISDS has been suspended under the CPTPP. In other words, foreign companies [can)] no longer sue governments over breach of investment contracts using ISDS.

“Some of the patent protection provisions which affect pharmaceuticals including biologics have also been exempted under the CPTPP,” Ong said.

Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, in an interview with Thai public broadcaster Thai PBS several weeks ago, had said that “the condition which allows companies to sue governments is no longer something we need to fear” under the CPTPP.

Malaysian pharmaceutical players, however, remain concerned over provisions that enable patent linkage, which could inhibit the registration of genetic medicines, thus making medication more expensive for the Malaysian public.

According to Chemical Company of Malaysia Bhd (CCM) group managing director Leonard Ariff Abdul Shatar, regulators had implemented patent-linkage in Malaysia about a month ago.

“We are in the midst of a patent battle at the moment. I can challenge a patent because this is a registration I got before the new regulations [took effect],” he shared with The Edge Financial Daily.

This is despite patents typically being a civil right, and not one that the state is responsible for protecting, he said.

Here’s another aspect to consider: The suspension of these 22 provisions does not amount to an outright rejection of them by members, raising worries that if the US does decide to rejoin the pact, existing members may be pressured into lifting the suspensions.

Although US President Donald Trump pulled his country out of the TPP, there is no knowing whether or not he could change his mind on participating in the deal if it may spite China, which is not a member of the agreement, or whether a future US president may decide to rejoin the deal.

“Signing the CPTPP will upset China, which may result in two paths: China will demand the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) on the same terms as the CPTPP or China will trade less favourably with us,” Wong said.

RCEP includes all 10 Asean nations, and Australia, China, Japan, Korea, India as well as New Zealand, which altogether make up some 30.4% of global GDP, according to Miti.

Dr Mahathir has voiced his support for continuing negotiations with RCEP, saying that as a powerful and rich country, China cannot be ignored.

However, Moody’s reported that gains from the RCEP would likely be lower than the CPTPP despite the inclusion of more sizeable countries, as the RCEP is narrower in scope and would overlap with existing arrangements, such as the Asean-China Free Trade Agreement.

The investor services provider had referred to an October 2017 report by the Peterson Institute for International Economics, which argued that Malaysia stands to gain an 8.6% or US$42 billion increase in exports via the CPTPP and just 3.4% or US$17 billion via the RCEP.

Despite this, Ong said Miti continues to play an active role in the RCEP negotiations, including at the sixth RCEP Ministerial Meeting which will take place on Thursday and Friday in Singapore.

Process not transparent

It has been said that negotiations of the CPTPP were kept under wraps under the previous administration, contrary to the high level of public engagement ahead of the TPP signing.

“The changes in the CPTPP [from the TPP] were not tabled or discussed in Parliament. We don’t know what they are, the process was not transparent,” Wong said.

CCM’s Leonard echoes this, saying there was little industry engagement when it came to the negotiations of the CPTPP, despite Miti having engaged industries ahead of the TPP.

“Those days, they gave a lot of industry meetings for the TPP. We were invited to speak against it. But for the CPTPP, it was very quiet,” he shared.

Ultimately, the decision to ratify the CPTPP rests with the Cabinet, which will take the disputed factors into consideration before arriving at a decision whether or not to continue with the process, Ong said.

According to Dr Mahathir, Malaysia cannot withdraw from the agreement without losing credibility as the previous government had already signed it.

“We will have to go ahead with CPTPP,” he said.

Jomo, however, said that opting out can be done simply by not ratifying it.

Source: The Edge Markets

225/ Investment Protection in EU Vietnam FTA

Vietnam and the EU recently completed the legal review of their EU Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (EVFTA). The agreement will now be translated into 22 EU official languages and sent to the European Parliament for final approval. Along with the FTA, EU and Vietnam has also concluded their discussions on an Investment Protection Agreement (IPA), which they decided to keep it separate from the FTA. The IPA, which is currently undergoing a legal review, aims to protect investors and investments in EU and Vietnam.

Protecting investors

An IPA, part of the FTA, is an agreement between two or more countries which aims to protect investors and investments in a host country. It ensures that they will be accorded fair treatment and will not be discriminated.

Usually, when there is a dispute between an investor and a host country, investors can reach out to the World Banks’s International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) or other similar tribunals permitted under their respective FTA for resolution.

In case of EVFTA, both parties have agreed to set up a permanent court, referred to as the “Tribunal” to handle such issues. This will not only protect investors and their investments but also protect a country’s right to oversee the implementation of public policies. In addition, the court system will be an independent dispute resolution system.

EU Vietnam tribunal system

Under the EVFTA, a permanent dispute resolution system will be set up that will handle disputes related to the investment protection provisions in the FTA, such as protection against expropriation without compensation.

Domestic courts will not be allowed to intervene or question the decision of the tribunals to ensure transparency and fair treatment.

Members

According to the EVFTA, the tribunal will comprise of nine members. The EU and Vietnam will each appoint three members, while the remaining three members will be appointed from a third country.

Court hearing process

All cases will be heard by a three-member team from the tribunal, with the EU, Vietnam, and a third country represented equally. The three members will be selected by the President of the Tribunal, with one condition that the chair of the group belongs to the third country, and not the EU or Vietnam.

Appeals

According to the EVFTA, a claimant can appeal the decision of the tribunal to a permanent appeal tribunal within 90 days under numerous grounds such as errors of law, errors of fact, and procedural unfairness of the tribunal’s decision.

If not appealed within 90 days, the decision of the tribunal will be deemed as final. The appeal tribunal will consist of six members, two each from the EU and Vietnam, and remaining two from a third country.

Alternative dispute resolution

Before reaching out to the tribunal, a claimant can request for a consultation or mediation. Consultations will be held either in Hanoi, Brussels, or the capital of a Member State of the EU concerned. It can also be conducted through video conference or in any other location, as agreed upon by the involved parties.

In the case of mediation, a mediator is appointed by agreement of the disputing parties and can be a member of the tribunal.

If a dispute claim is not settled within 90 days of the submission of the request for consultations, a claimant can send a notice of intent to submit a claim. If a dispute is still not resolved within three months from the submission of the notice of intent to submit a claim or 6 months from the submission of the request for consultations, they can forward their claim to the tribunal. However, a claimant cannot submit a claim to the tribunal in case the claim is already pending before any other domestic or international tribunal or court.

Currently, Vietnam is the EU’s second biggest trading partner in the ASEAN, after Singapore, with bilateral trade in 2017 reaching US$ 55.1 billion.

The trade agreement, which both parties aim to bring into effect by 2019, will eliminate over 99 percent of the tariffs. The FTA will boost Vietnam’s GDP by $3.2 billion by 2020, $6.7 billion by 2025, and $7.2 billion by 2030.

Source: Vietnam Briefing

 

Tin bài 28/8

226/ President: Vietnam maintains friendship with Egypt via different channels

Vietnam always attaches importance to maintaining the traditional friendship with Egypt via State, National Assembly and Government channels, and people-to-people exchange, President Tran Dai Quang said on August 27.

At a meeting with Speaker of the House of Representatives of Egypt Ali Abdel Aal in Cairo as part of his State visit to the country, President Quang lauded the Egyptian legislature for its efforts in establishing the Egypt-Vietnam Friendship Parliamentarians’ Group.

He expressed his hope that the group and its Vietnamese counterpart will intensify exchanges to promote the inter-parliamentary ties, contributing to consolidating the fruitful relations between the two countries.

Vietnam always treasures the traditional friendship, the leader said, expressing his thanks to Egyptian people for their valuable support to Vietnam during its past struggle for national liberation as well as the present cause of national construction and development.

He spoke highly of achievements Egypt has recorded in maintaining political stability and national development, which have seen constructive contributions of the Egyptian legislative body.

The President urged parliamentary agencies of the two countries to increase delegation exchange and cooperation and mutual support at regional and international inter-parliamentary forums.

On this occasion, President Quang conveyed National Assembly Chairwoman Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan’s invitation to Speaker Ali Abdel Aal to pay an official visit to Vietnam. The Egyptian top legislator accepted the invitation with pleasure.

The host expressed his admiration for Vietnam’s efforts for national independence in the past, and his impression of the country’s economic development.

Vietnam and Egypt established diplomatic ties 55 years ago but the foundation for their relationship was laid since President Ho Chi Minh’s visit to Egypt more than a century ago, he said.

Over the past 55 years, the two countries have reaped significant cooperation achievements, especially in politics, diplomacy, economy, trade, culture, education and training, the leader noted.

Ali Abdel Aal said he hopes President Quang’s visit will contribute to creating breakthroughs in the bilateral ties, particularly in economy, in order to soon complete the target of raising the two-way trade to 1 billion USD in 2020, for the interest of each nation.

He assigned the Egypt-Vietnam Friendship Parliamentarians’ Group to work as a bridge to promote cooperation and mutual understanding between the two countries as well as their legislatures.

Source: VNA

 

 

 

 

Tin bài 29/8

227/ United States initiates WTO dispute complaint against Russian duties on US imports

The United States has requested WTO dispute consultations with the Russian Federation concerning additional duties applied by Russia on certain imports of US goods. The request was circulated to WTO members on 29 August.

The United States claims that the additional duties are inconsistent with provisions of the WTO’s General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 because Russia does not impose the additional duties on like products from other WTO members and appears to be applying duty rates on US imports greater than those set out in Russia’s WTO schedule of concessions.

Further information is available in document WT/DS566/1

What is a request for consultations?

The request for consultations formally initiates a dispute in the WTO. Consultations give the parties an opportunity to discuss the matter and to find a satisfactory solution without proceeding further with litigation. After 60 days, if consultations have failed to resolve the dispute, the complainant may request adjudication by a panel.

• More on consultations
• Current status of disputes

Source:wto.org

 

228/ ASEAN updates AEC 2025 Consolidated Strategic Action Plan

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has updated the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) 2025 Consolidated Strategic Action Plan (CSAP) to include action lines from sectoral work plans.

A press release on the ASEAN Secretariat website, explained that following its first publication on February 6, 2017, and as mandated by the AEC Council, the AEC 2025 CSAP was updated to include the Strategic Action Plan 2016-2025 for ASEAN Taxation Cooperation, the ASEAN Work Programme on Electronic Commerce 2017-2025 and the AEC 2025 Trade Facilitation Strategic Action Plan.

The updates also include ASEAN Work Plan on Good Regulatory Practices 2016-2017 and changes to the timelines and key action lines of other AEC sectoral bodies—all of which were endorsed after the initial publication.

The press release states that the AEC 2025 CSAP complements the AEC 2025 Blueprint by serving as a single reference document intended to inform stakeholders of the key action lines that will be implemented in pursuit of ASEAN economic integration agenda from 2016 to 2025. These action lines are drawn from across the AEC Sectoral Work Plans.

It was also shared that the AEC 2025 CSAP will be reviewed and updated periodically to take into account developments over the 10-year period of the AEC Blueprint 2025 implementation and facilitate stakeholder feedback on ASEAN economic integration priorities.

Source: Borneo Bulletin

 

Tin bài 30/8

229/ RCEP: India must safeguard its interests

Tariff woes in RCEP 

Industry is concerned about tariff concessions, and the services sector isn’t getting any meaningful market access

In recent years, the three mega free trade agreements (FTAs) — Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) and Trans Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) — have been at the centre of trade policy debate worldwide. However, US President Donald Trump and Brexit have abruptly changed the entire scenario. While TPP and TTIP appear to be in ‘deep freeze’, RCEP is the only one where the steady progress is being witnessed.

The RCEP is an ambitious proposal which intends to bring in the three largest economies of Asia — China, India and Japan — into a regional trading bloc, along with ASEAN member-countries, Australia, South Korea and New Zealand. The trade area will be the largest in terms of population (3.4 billion or 49 per cent of world population), with a combined GDP of around $22 trillion and a trade share of 30 per cent. When fully established, it will become the largest trade bloc in the world.

As per conservative estimates, once implemented, RCEP would bring large income gains, of $260-644 billion, to the world economy in a decade or so. The RCEP can help regionalise the sophisticated global production networks that make Asia the world’s factory and will also integrate the region’s markets and production centres. It will also reduce the overlap among Asian FTAs, lest Asia becomes a confusing ‘noodle bowl’ of multiple trade rules.

India joined this mega grouping to advance its own trade integration. Although the country has entered into trading and investment agreements with ASEAN, Japan and Korea, its presence in the vibrant global supply-chains in the region is not commensurate with its manufacturing potential. India certainly cannot afford to be excluded from new regional trade chains and hence, its participation in RCEP is an imperative. However, legitimate concerns of Indian trade and commerce have to be addressed with a progressive look.

The strategy is also aligned to India’s Act East Policy which builds on the Look East Policy for closer partnership with the Asian region. Changing geopolitics and growing focus on the Asia-Pacific region influenced India’s decision to join RCEP. However, the biggest challenge India is facing in RCEP arises from its trade deficit with ten of the RCEP countries, particularly with China with whom India has a huge trade imbalance.

Tariff levels

It was to be expected that given the tariff levels in the important RCEP markets are already low, the negotiated tariff reductions from the Indian side will be relatively greater. Indian industry has been somewhat apprehensive about tariff reductions in RCEP, which would further open its markets to Asian goods, especially from China. Major sectors that may be impacted include steel, plastics, copper, aluminium, machine tools, chemicals, textiles and pharma, which would suffer from cheaper imports.

At the same time, India has been undertaking wide-ranging domestic reforms to make its manufacturing sector more competitive. The ‘Make in India’ initiative has targeted multiple areas such as investment facilitation, trade facilitation, and foreign direct investments with notable results. These efforts are now gaining increasing urgency and must be further fast-tracked to connect to the Asian production networks.

Another area where India can be particularly vulnerable is agri products. The huge concessions being sought by Australia in agri products can be an extremely sensitive issue for India’s farmers. Indian farmers need support from the government in view of their low productivity and low income levels.

Since the start of the negotiations, the Indian government, supported by industry, has emphasised the need for a balanced agreement through access to services market and investments. Services are India’s major trade strength, and it enjoys a 3 per cent share in global services exports, compared to 1.6 per cent in merchandise exports.

Indian industry has highlighted the need for parallel RCEP negotiations on all fronts of trade in goods, services and investments as ‘single undertaking’. There has been a push from some countries to harness the ‘tariff only’ component before negotiations on services and investments as a fait accompli. India has a clear interest in services in the RCEP market that can be taken forward in the dialogue for better outcomes. The RCEP negotiations seem to have entered a crucial phase as the 23rd round of negotiations was completed in July 2018. Members are in the process of making their revised/final tariff reduction offer. Indian industry has raised its concerns about tariff concession to China. In services, the discussions have not gained much traction and India seems to be not getting any meaningful market access.

The government has constituted a Group of Ministers to further deliberate on the contours of its stance regarding RCEP. With the 33rd ASEAN Summit approaching, India would continue to face pressure for conclusion of RCEP. India must safeguard the interest of Indian industry — services and the agriculture sector.

The writer is President, Confederation of Indian Industry.

Source: The Hindu Business Line

 

Tin bài 31/8

230/ U.S., Mexico reach NAFTA deal, turn up pressure on Canada

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The United States and Mexico agreed on Monday to overhaul the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), putting pressure on Canada to agree to new terms on auto trade and dispute settlement rules to remain part of the three-nation pact.

Auto stocks soared and the S&P 500 and the Nasdaq rallied to record highs on the expectation that Canada would sign onto the deal and ease the economic uncertainty caused by U.S. President Donald Trump’s repeated threats to ditch the 1994 accord.

Details of gains and concessions in the deal were only starting to emerge on Monday. Trump threatened he still could put tariffs on Canadian-made cars if Canada did not join its neighbors and warned he expected concessions on Canada’s dairy protections.

“I think with Canada, frankly, the easiest we can do is to tariff their cars coming in. It’s a tremendous amount of money and it’s a very simple negotiation. It could end in one day and we take in a lot of money the following day,” Trump said.

Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau discussed trade in a telephone call on Monday and “agreed to continue productive conversations,” White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said in a statement.

Negotiations among the three partners, whose mutual trade totals more than $1 trillion annually, have dragged on for more than a year, putting pressure on the Mexican peso MXN= and the Canadian dollar CAD=. Both currencies gained against the U.S. dollar after Monday’s announcement.

The political stakes are high for all three countries. Trump and Republicans in the U.S. Congress up for re-election in November want to ensure farmers and other voters whose jobs depend on trade with Canada and Mexico that the deal is sealed.

Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto wants to sign the agreement before leaving office at the end of November, and Trudeau faces a national election expected by October 2019.

Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland is expected to travel to Washington for talks on Tuesday. Her spokesman said Canada would sign only a new agreement that is good for the country.

Trump’s economic adviser, Larry Kudlow, told reporters the deal with Mexico should serve as a “reset” for talks with Canada.

If talks with Canada are not wrapped up by the end of this week, Trump plans to notify Congress that he has reached a deal with Mexico, but would be open to Canada joining, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer told reporters.

The White House said Trump will sign the deal in 90 days. Congress has to approve it.

“There are still issues with Canada but I think they could be resolved very quickly,” a senior trade official told Reuters in an interview.

Some Republicans in Congress called the deal a positive step but said Canada must be part of the new pact.

Trudeau spoke to Pena Nieto on Sunday and shared their commitment to reaching a successful conclusion of NAFTA “for all three parties,” the prime minister’s office said.

Mexican Foreign Minister Luis Videgaray told a news conference in Washington that if Canada and the United States do not reach an agreement on NAFTA, “we already know that there will still be a deal between Mexico and the United States.”

NEW AUTO RULES

The Mexico-U.S. discussions focused on crafting new rules for the automotive industry, which Trump has put at the heart of his drive to rework a pact he has repeatedly described as a “disaster” for American workers.

Matt Blunt, president of the American Automotive Policy Council, which represents General Motors Co (GM.N), Ford Motor Co (F.N) and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV (FCHA.MI), said the group was optimistic about the new deal, though it was still reviewing the details.

The deal would require 75 percent of auto content to be made in the NAFTA region, up from the current level of 62.5 percent, a U.S. trade official said. A fact sheet describing the bilateral agreement specified the content would be made in the United States and Mexico.

That requirement could shift some auto parts manufacturing to Mexico from China, a White House official told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity.

The Trump administration said the deal improves labor provisions, in part by requiring 40 percent to 45 percent of auto content to be made by workers earning at least $16 per hour.

That measure could move some production back to the United States from Mexico and should lift Mexican wages, the White House official said.

A source in South Korea’s auto industry said many automakers would find it difficult to meet the rule on workers’ wages, which are much cheaper in Mexico. The trade minister said South Korea was analysing the deal’s impact on its auto industry.

Some Japanese automakers could face a similar challenge, but their responses on Tuesday were mostly positive.

“Toyota is pleased to hear that progress is being made by U.S. and Mexico negotiators to reach a consensus on modernizing NAFTA,” the car maker said.

“We are hopeful that any changes are fair and balanced.”

Nissan said it was “encouraged that an agreement was reached, and hope that it appropriately considers the impact on our employees, suppliers and customers.”

The United States relented on its demand for an automatic expiration for the deal, known as a “sunset clause.”

Instead, the United States and Mexico agreed to a 16-year lifespan for the deal, with a review every six years that can extend the pact for 16 years, Lighthizer said.

Mexico agreed to eliminate dispute settlement panels for certain anti-dumping cases, a move that could complicate talks with Canada, which had insisted on the panels.

Monday’s announcement lifted equity markets in all three countries, with shares in automotive companies standing out on relief that the deal appeared to end the uncertainty that has dogged the sector for months.

General Motors Co (GM.N), Ford Motor Co (F.N), and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV (FCAU.N) gained between 3.3 percent and 4.8 percent, while Canadian auto parts makers such as Magna International Inc (MG.TO) gained 4.6 percent.

Source: Reuters