The Marginalisation of African Agrigultural Trade and Development: A Case Study of the WTO'S Efforts to Cater to African Agricultural Trading Interests Particularly Cotton and Sugar
| DOI | 10.3366/E0954889009000383 |
| Published date | 01 September 2009 |
| Author | Guled Yusuf |
| Date | 01 September 2009 |
| Pages | 213-239 |
The overarching purpose of the WTO is the management and liberalisation of international trade. The most consequential and politically sensitive markets addressed by the WTO are, in the view of African countries, those related to the agricultural sector. Prior to the establishment of the WTO in 1995 attempts were made to liberalise agricultural trade, through its predecessor the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, in the Kennedy and Tokyo Rounds, but they failed primarily due to the unwillingness of the European Union to modify the protection afforded by its Common Agricultural Policy.
G. Winham, ‘An Interpretative History of the Uruguay Round Negotiation’, from P. Macrory,
J. Von Braun,
Senior Officials’ Group, GATT doc. SR.SOG/2, November 22 1985, at 8. Senior Officials Group, Record of Discussions: Note by the Secretariat, GATT Doc., SR.SOG/2, November 22 1985, at 17.
The issue of agricultural trade liberalisation has therefore become extremely decisive for two reasons in particular. First, it is symptomatic of the WTO's fulfillment of the aspirations and trade interests of commodity producing developing countries, particularly in sub-Saharan African (SSA), and equality between member states. For example nearly 80% of the population in sub-Saharan Africa live in rural areas and 70% of this rural population is dependent on food production since small-scale farming provides most of the food produced in Africa, as well as employment for 60% of the employment force.
‘The Crisis in African Agriculture: A More Effective Role for EC Aid?’,
The central question of whether the WTO succeeds in satisfying SSA trade interests, particularly in the field of agriculture, and the immediately correlated issue of development is therefore decisive in the prospects of the successful maintenance of the organisation in the view of most SSA countries as well as their citizens. In order to respond to this momentous query, we will evaluate the progress of endeavours under the auspices of the WTO to liberalise trade in agriculture, in general, and particularly sugar and cotton. As two of the most distorted and politically contentious agricultural markets, the progress regarding these two products will provide invaluable insights into the extent to which the multilateral trade framework is development friendly and can contribute to the elimination of poverty in African countries. In order to fully comprehend the significance, we will commence by analysing the strategic and developmental importance of both resources, in Section I. This discussion will provide the necessary insights and accentuate the high stakes by determining the contribution of both commodities to gross domestic product, agricultural export revenue, poverty alleviation, employment, food security, innovation, and development. Afterwards, we will explore, Section II, the current barriers to trade (tariff and non-tariff), and contemporary preferential agreements. These trade barriers have severely restricted international trade, protected producers of sugar and cotton in developed countries while simultaneously depreciating global prices and injuring SSA economies. As the most distorted agricultural commodity, sugar will underscore the inequitable trade circumstances that SSA producers face in the global market. In order to address these difficulties, and integrate SSA countries into the world economy preferential agreements were introduced in the 1970s. These include the Yaoundé Conventions, Lomé Conventions, Cotonou Agreement, Everything But Arms initiative, African Growth and Opportunity Act, and the Economic Partnership Agreements. We will demonstrate that these agreements did not provide an effective solution due to the unbalanced negotiations, the ensuing detriment to less developed countries that weren't participants, the lack of progress in the most politically sensitive agricultural markets, and the breach of GATT provisions (GATT Part IV and GATT article XXIV). Most importantly these agreements discouraged innovative and genuine progress through the WTO and therefore promoted the canonisation of an unbalanced political solution. After a critical analysis of the preferential trade agreements we will appraise the benefits of trade liberalisation and demonstrate that it is a legitimate and beneficial endeavor, Section III. This will include an empirical demonstration of the deleterious economic effects of trade barriers, and the universal benefits of trade liberalisation. Once the merits of trade liberalisation have been expounded we will assess the efforts to liberalise trade in agriculture during the various GATT/WTO rounds, Section IV. Our analysis will indicate a growing recognition of the imperative to address agricultural trade specifically and the developmental issues attached to eliminating trade distortion. Although the Uruguay Round and Doha Development Round addressed these issues there are numerous difficulties in implementing many of the assurances made during negotiations due to the legal frailty of the agreements. Our analysis will focus on these difficulties and the lack of legal penalties. This will lead to an exploration of the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) and African nonparticipation. In light of our focus on sugar and cotton we will evaluate the decisions on EC Sugar and US cotton, elucidating the potential of the DSB and the restrictions, primarily structural, which still exist. Finally, we will explain the need for further reform efforts through a reframing of the WTO disciplines to promote development and the manner in which we can attain this objective. This holistic approach will reveal the pressing difficulties faced by African agricultural producers, and the avenues available to remedy them within the framework of the World Trade Organisation.
The Chairman of the African Union's New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) stated in 2003 ‘that agriculture will provide the engine for growth in Africa’.
O. Obasanjo,
‘Can Africa Claim the 21st century?’,
S. Haggblade, E. Gabre-Madhin, ‘Successes in African Agriculture: Results of an Expert Survey’, 32(5)
The two commodities have played a historically important role in Africa and are some of the most widely produced agricultural crops in the world. Indicatively, ‘thirty-five of the 53 African countries produce cotton, and 32 of them are exporters’.
G. Estur, ‘The Competitiveness of African Cotton in the World Market’,
To continue reading
Request your trial