Wto doha round japan s position
1 / 27

- PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

CPL2 561 781. North America and Global Economy. WTO Doha Round: Japan’s Position. Presented by:. Kyoo Son 260099687. Minh Ho 260204029. Table of Content. Agriculture Services Market Access for Non-Agricultural Products TRIPS Singaporean Issues Fisheries Dispute Settlement

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about '' - idana

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Wto doha round japan s position

CPL2 561 781

North America and Global Economy

WTO Doha Round: Japan’s Position

Presented by:

Kyoo Son260099687

Minh Ho260204029

Table of content
Table of Content

  • Agriculture

  • Services

  • Market Access for Non-Agricultural Products


  • Singaporean Issues

  • Fisheries

  • Dispute Settlement

  • Anti-dumping

Agriculture position
Agriculture: Position

  • Doha's Official Ministerial Declaration

  • Japan's unyielding position

  • Prime importance of multi-benefits of agriculture for the country

Agriculture analysis
Agriculture: Analysis

  • The world's biggest net importer

Figure 2.017,18

Agriculture analysis1
Agriculture: Analysis

  • Concentration of food production

Figure 2.119

Agriculture analysis2
Agriculture: Analysis

  • Central Union of Agricultural Cooperatives' lobby

Services maximizing trade liberalization
Services: Maximizing trade liberalization

Figure 2.216

Services maritime transport
Services: Maritime Transport

Figure 2.320,21,22,23

Services energy
Services: Energy

Figure 2.424p1

Services misc
Services: Misc.

  • Education

  • MFN Exemptions

Market access for non agricultural products
Market Access for Non Agricultural Products

  • Tariff peaks and tariff escalations

    • The United States have generally low tariffs but apply tariff peaks on sensitive sectors such as textile, footwear, leather goods and jewelry

    • Japan asked for elimination of tariff peaks and stated that they should be rectified efficiently.

    • Position supported by countries like South Korea and Norway

    • Norway stated that the current unbalance tariffs make it difficult for developing countries to receive value for their raw materials

Market access for non agricultural products1
Market Access for Non Agricultural Products

  • Tariff reduction formulas

    Three possible types of formulas

    Formula approach

    • Tariff reductions are applied to all non agricultural products

    • More pressure and reductions on sensitive sectors, US against this approach

    • Support from EC, Korea, Canada and Japan


    • Bilateral agreements with offer lists on tariff reductions; US for this approach

      Zero-for-zero approach

    • Extensively used in Uruguay Round; Tariff reductions on a product for entire Market

Japanese position on tariff reduction formulas
Japanese Position on Tariff reduction formulas

  • It suggested that is was open to both the formula approach as well as the “zero-for-zero” and “harmonization” (formula) approach, assuming there is meaningful participation by as many Members as possible

  • Japan has the lowest tariff on manufacturing goods

  • After Uruguay Round, Japan significantly reduced tariffs on textiles.

  • 70% of textile products are imports

  • Most of imports come from China

Trips trade related aspects to intellectual property rights
TRIPS (Trade related Aspects to Intellectual Property Rights)

  • Compulsory Licensing

    African countries wanted the simplification in notifications to import generic drugs

    Japanese position is that the notification obligations such as specifying in advance the name and the exact quantity is necessary to ensure drugs are not re-exported.

    The position is shared by developed countries like EU, Switzerland and US who are major patented medicines producers.

TRIPS Rights)

Discussions on these issues have largely focused on whether the TRIPS Agreement should be made to require applicants to disclose the country of origin and source of any genetic material/TK used either in the research and development process and/or directly in the invention they seek to patent. This could include providing evidence of prior informed consent of the country/community of origin, and how they intend to share the benefits arising from the commercialization of the invention with the country/ community of origin.

Japan and US are firmly opposed. They believe it will be a burden to patent system

US and Japan hold respectively 40% and 14% of biotechnological patents. They are the largest patent holders (OECD 2002 report).

Singapore issues
Singapore Issues Rights)

Singapore issues included discussions in areas such as government procurement, investment, competition and trade facilitation. Only trade facilitation remained on the negotiation table in this Round.

Japan pushed for multilateral rules regarding the investment that could replace existing bilateral investment rules

It issued reports that lack of transparency, regulations, laws and lack of information were major obstacles for Japanese firms investing in foreign countries

In trade facilitation issue, Japan, the EC, Canada and the United States had submitted proposals that would require clarification of customs procedures, including fees, penalties, appeal of decisions, and introduction of an advance ruling system

Developing countries are against on these issues because of lack of resources in implementing those rules and the sovereignty issues

Fisheries subsidies
Fisheries Subsidies Rights)

Friends of Fish countries asked for elimination of fisheries subsidies to promote environment and trade. They stated that subsidies were responsible for depletion of fishing stocks.

Japan stated subsidies themselves are not causing illegal fishing or depletion of reserves. The fish stock depletion was caused by inadequate management. But, in 2004 report, it stated there should be some disciplines regarding subsidies.

Friends of Fish favor for bottom-up-approach that prohibits for general elimination of subsidies with some exemptions

Japan favors for top-down approach. Position shared by Taiwan and Korea

Fisheries subsidies cont d
Fisheries Subsidies cont’d Rights)

  • Japan is already highly dependent on fish imports. The subsidies in fisheries are needed to support revenues for remaining independent fishers . The population living on fisheries is growing old and diminishing. Fishing is small scale and rather rudimentary in Japan.

Dispute settlement understanding
Dispute Settlement Understanding Rights)

  • Japan and EU jointly made submission about the procedure to be followed when a Member under trade sanction notifies the WTO that it has brought the condemned measures into compliance with the dispute settlement ruling. They suggested that if that the Member applying the sanctions does not request a compliance panel within 60 days of notification, the DSB shall, upon request, withdraw the authorization to retaliate.

  • Japan and EU want the parties applying the sanctions bear the burden to prove its case. A country applying the sanctions for retaliation has interests to not lift them even after another country under sanctions have made measures of compliances and reported to WTO.

Anti dumping position
Anti-dumping: Position Rights)

  • A tool of choice of protectionists

  • Making unsubstantiated investigation requests more difficult

  • Clarifying the meaning of "dumped imports“

  • Increasing the current de-minimis dumping margin

Anti dumping analysis
Anti-dumping: Rights)Analysis

  • A target of anti-dumping investigations

Figure 2.525,26

Anti dumping analysis1
Anti-dumping: Rights)Analysis

  • Antidumping investigation results

Figure 2.625,27

Conclusion Rights)

References Rights)

  • 1: Http://Www.Sidley.Com/Db30/Cgi-Bin/Pubs/Dohaupdate.Pdf

  • 2: WTO document G/Ag/Ng/W/91: Negotiating Proposal By Japan On Wto Agricultural Negotiations

  • 3: Http://Www.Mofa.Go.Jp/Policy/Economy/Wto/Min99/Agri.Html

  • 4:Http://Www.Cedla.Uva.Nl/Pdf/Agriculture's%20Multifunctionality%20and%20the%20WTO,%20Kym%20Anderson.Pdf

  • 5: Http://Www.Mofa.Go.Jp/Policy/Economy/Wto/Min99/Service.Html

  • 6: WTO document S/CSS/W/137: Negotiating Proposal On Education Services

  • 7: WTO document S/CSS/W/42/Suppl.3: Negotiation Proposal On Energy Services

  • 8: WTO document S/CSS/W/42: The Negotiations On Trade In Services

  • 9: WTO document Tn/Rl/Gen/124: Proposal On Procedure Of Providing Non-Confidential Application

  • 10: WTO document Tn/Rl/Gen/65/Rev.1: Proposal On Dumped Imports

  • 11: “Whither The Wto?” Http://Www.Freetrade.Org/Pubs/Pas/Tpa-023.Pdf

  • 12: Http://Www.Mofa.Go.Jp/Policy/Economy/Wto/Min99/Anti-Dump.Html

  • 13: WTO document Tn/Rl/Gen/30/Rev.1: Proposal On De Minimis Margins Of Dumping

  • 14: http://www.cfr.org/publication/8058/on_japan.html

  • 15: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Union_of_Agricultural_Cooperatives

  • 16: http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/its2005_e/its05_byregion_e.pdf

  • 17: http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/its2004_e/section4_e/iv08.xls

  • 18: http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/its2004_e/section4_e/iv09.xls

  • 19: http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/its2004_e/section4_e/iv07b.xls

  • 20: http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/its2000/section3/iii78.xls

  • 21: http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/its2002_e/section3_e/iii80.xls

  • 22: http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/its2004_e/section3_e/iii79.xls

References cont d
References, cont’d Rights)

  • 23: http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/its2006_e/section3_e/iii76.xls

  • 24: http://www.fpcj.jp/e/mres/publication/ff/pdf/12_energy.pdf

  • 25: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/adp_e/adp_stattab1_e.xls

  • 26: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/adp_e/adp_stattab2_e.xls

  • 27: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/adp_e/adp_stattab6_e.xls

  • 28: http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/its2005_e/section1_e/i07.xls

  • 29: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2007/february/tradoc_133290.pdf

  • 30: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/51/59/36760212.pdf

  • 31: http://www.stat.go.jp/English/data/handbook/c05cont.htm

  • 32: http://www.ncseonline.org/NLE/CRSreports/06Sep/RL33634.pdf

  • 33: http://www.iie.com

  • 34: http://www.ictsd.org/pubs/dohabriefings/Doha_Hong_Kong_Update.pdf

  • 35: http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/negotiations/wto_bulletin/2007/wto_bulletin_070201.html

  • 36: http://www.ncseonline.org/NLE/CRSreports/06Oct/RL33144.pdf

  • 37: http://www.meti.go.jp/english/information/data/cWTOnonag_a1e.html

  • 38: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/51/59/36760212.pdf