\r\n The old traders’ adage “better to travel than arrive” has been true in 2017. Last year wa...
\r\n President Donald Trump signed on 28 March 2017 an executive order to unravel former President B...
\r\n According to some scientists, the fingerprint of human-caused climate change has been found on ...
\r\n Australia’s federal government has announced it will ratify and implement the OPCAT Treaty, O...
\r\n Nurses and teachers are among those bearing the brunt of a debt crisis rooted in the mistaken b...

Follow us



In what seems to be a backlash to the recent furore at the WTO over the issue of food stockpiling for food security purposes as well as the calculation of AMS, the US wants to introduce the concept of 'differentiation' of developing countries in the WTO negotiations on agriculture.

The ‘differentiation’ approach which has already been rejected by India and China makes a distinction between developing countries that have existing domestic support programmes in agriculture that could influence global trends and other developing countries which do not have such schemes. 

Moving away from existing Doha mandate of special and differential treatment for developing countries, US referring to recent studies said in the WTO General Council meeting that it would have to make significant cuts in its outlay for domestic support under the present draft modalities and termed it as "blood for water" or "blood for air". 

The farm lobbies in the US are relying on study of Washington based DTB Associates accusing China, India, Brazil, Turkey and Thailand of providing trade distorting subsidies illegal under their respective WTO pledges.  

India and China said that it is important to protect policy space and global trading system being highly inequitable there was a need for a level-playing field. 

 The gLAWcal Team

Monday, 22 February 2014

(Source: Economic Times)

This news has been realized by gLAWcal—Global Law Initiatives for Sustainable Development in collaboration with the University Institute of European Studies (IUSE) in Turin, Italy and the University of Piemonte Orientale, Novara, Italy which are both beneficiaries of the European Union Research Executive Agency IRSES Project “Liberalism in Between Europe And China” (LIBEAC) coordinated by Aix-Marseille University (CEPERC). This work has been realized in the framework of Workpackages 4, coordinated by University Institute of European Studies (IUSE) in Turin, Italy.