[Pirateninfo] BRIDGES Trade BioRes, Vol. 3 No. 14 25 August 2003

[Martin Sundermann]

Hallo Miteinander,
heute zunächst die Ressourcen der aktuellen Ausgaben von Bridges und weiter unten selektierte Infos zum Thema WTO-Konferenz in Cancun. Zu Beginn zwei Nachschlagewerke: zum Cartagena-Protocol von ISAAA (die erste vernünftige, wenngleich nicht besondders aufschlussreiche Publikation der Org; 37Kb) und zur WTO (Glossar: Decoding the WTO; 874 Kb)


RESOURCES

26 DAYS LEFT BEFORE CARTAGENA PROTOCOL ON BIOSAFETY ENTERS INTO FORCE:
NECESSARY ACTION, PREPARATIONS, AND CONSIDERATIONS BEFORE 11TH SEPTEMBER
2003. By the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech
Applications (ISAAA, 2003). The document contains information about actions
that will be required by the Cartagena Biosafety Protocol (CBP) once it goes
into force on September 11, 2003. It also provides background information on
the CBP and relevant links. The document is available online at
http://www.isaaa.org/kc/Bin/Issues/Cartagena/index.htm

CRACKING THE WTO CODE: UNDERSTANDING TRADE TERMS. By Friends of the Earth
International a guide to help would-be trade campaigners crack the WTO code.
Understanding trade jargon is an essential first step for anyone wanting to
understand or change the international trade system. For the sake of
simplicity this guide does not attempt to analyse any of the terms that are
included – it is more like a quick-reference dictionary. Also, this tool
does not in any way cover the entire range of terms used on a day-to-day
basis by those that are on WTO-related issues. The guide is available online
at: http://www.foei.org/publications/trade/wtoglossarysnenglish_lowresol.pdf

PUBLIC FORUM ON GENE-SPLICED CROPS. Launched by Unilever, Co-operative
Group, Greenpeace, and the Consumers' Association (July 2003). Two of
Britain's largest retailers, Unilever and Co-operative Group, have joined
forces with the Consumers' Association and Greenpeace to set up an
"independent GM citizens' jury" in a bid to aid government thinking as it
decides whether to allow GM crops to be grown commercially in Britain. The
jurors will produce a report at the end of September outlining its
conclusions and overall verdict, which will be then presented to food,
farming and environment ministers to review. For further information see:
http://www.checkbiotech.org/root/index.cfm?fuseaction=newsletter&topic_id=2&
subtopic_id=9&doc_id=5738

THE ECONOMICS OF GENERATING AND MAINTAINING PLANT VARIETY RIGHTS IN CHINA.
By Koo, B.; Pardey, P.G.; Qian, K.; Zhang, Y. (International Food Policy
Research Institute, July 2003). This paper empirically examines the pattern
of plant variety protection (PVP) applications in China since its PVP laws
were first introduced in 1997. It places those PVP rights in the context of
China's present and likely future seed markets to identify the economic
incentives and institutional aspects that influence decisions to develop and
apply for varietal rights. The paper concludes that if China adopted the
U.S. pattern of PVP costs, the economic extent of protection would expand
considerably. However, this result is sensitive to a number of assumptions,
not least those regarding the present value of the costs to develop new
varieties versus the costs of protecting the intellectual property embodied
in them. The paper is available online at:
http://www.ifpri.org/divs/eptd/dp/papers/eptdp100.pdf

COMMUNITY FARMERS AND BREEDERS RIGHTS IN AFRICA: TOWARDS A LEGAL FRAMEWORK
FOR SUI GENERIS LEGISLATION. By Kameri-Mbote, P. (International
Environmental Law Research Centre, July 2003). This article analyses
international and Kenyan legal frameworks for the protection of biodiversity
and plant varieties. It looks at TRIPS and the CBD in terms of their
coverage, synergies and recent developments. It seeks to identify
cross-cutting issues and trends pertinent to the protection and enforcement
of community, farmers' and breeders' rights through sui generis systems. It
argues that laws protecting biodiversity in general and plant varieties in
particular are steeped in favour of individual property rights not suited to
protecting those of the community. Developing countries, particularly in
Africa, should seize the opportunity given to them by TRIPS to devise a sui
generis system to protect their plant varieties. The article is available
online at: http://www.ielrc.org/Content/A03021P.pdf

BETWEEN MYTH AND REALITY: GENETICALLY MODIFIED MAIZE, AN EXAMPLE OF A
SIZEABLE SCIENTIFIC CONTROVERSY. By Wisniewski, J. P.; Frangne, N.;
Massonneau, A.; Dumas, C. (Biochimie vol. 84 (11), Editions Scientifiques et
Medicales Elsevier SAS, 2003). This debate, which addresses both safety and
ethical aspects, has raised questions about the impact of genetically
modified (GM) crops on the biodiversity of traditional landraces and on the
environment. The authors review some of the key points of maize genetic
history as well as the methods used to stably transform this cereal. They
describe the genetically engineered Bt-maizes available for field
cultivation and they investigate the controversial reports on their impacts
on non-target insects such as the monarch butterfly and on the flow of
transgenes into Mexican maize landraces. For further information contact:
Ecole Normale Superieure de Lyon, tel: +33 4 72 72 80 00.

GENETICALLY MODIFIED CROPS. By Nigel G Halford (Imperial College Press,
London, July 2003). This book describes the history and development of the
science and techniques that underpin plant biotechnology, GM crops that are
grown commercially around the world and the new varieties that are being
developed. It covers failures as well as successes. The safety record of GM
crops is reviewed together with the legislation that has been adopted to
cover their use. The book also deals with the concerns of consumers, the GM
crop debate and the prospects for the technology. More information can be
viewed online at the link below:
http://www.wspc.com.sg/books/lifesci/p284.html

AGRICULTURE AND ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES IN FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS. By Dale
Colyer (in the Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy,
July 2003). The paper explores the implications for agriculture and the
environment of international trade agreements, such as the World Trade
Organisation, the Free Trade Area of the Americas, and other regional and
bilateral trade agreements. Agriculture is and will continue to be a major
contributor to environmental degradation, inducing the conversion of natural
ecosystems to agricultural production as the sector responds to increased
demand for food and fibres due to increases in population and wealth. The
paper can be viewed at: http://128.233.156.252/estey/

STOLEN FRUIT – THE TROPICAL COMMODITIES DISASTER. By Peter Robbins (Zed
Boods, July 2003). Fifty or more developing countries still depend mainly on
the tropical commodities or minerals that they produce. But encouraging so
many countries to grow coffee, sugar, cotton and other crops has been a
disaster. Peter Robbins examines how this situation came about, the current
trading arrangements and the possible ways forward. He argues that, if
developing countries are to measure up to the scale of the disaster facing
them, they must take a leaf out of supply side economics, and take the
measures to bring supply and demand into a balance that will secure them far
higher and more stable prices. For further information or to order a copy of
this title by post, contact Mohammed Umar, tel: +44 (0)20 7837 4014; fax:
+44 (0)20 7833 3960; email: sales at zedbooks.demon.co.uk; Internet:
http://www.zedbooks.demon.co.uk/

ENDING HUNGER IN OUR LIFETIME: FOOD SECURITY AND GLOBALISATION. By C. Ford
Runge, Benjamin Senauer, Philip G. Pardey, Mark W. Rosegrant (International
Food Policy Research Institute, 2003). The authors of this book bring good
news: hunger can be banished in our lifetime. They first distil what is
already known about fighting hunger and then report on important new
research findings and projections that show it can be done, through new and
renewed institutions, scientific innovation, global economics and
investment, and sustainable environmental practices. Anyone wanting a better
understanding of poverty and hunger and how to end it will benefit from
reading it. For further information visit:
http://www.drc.org.nz/bookshop/Detailed/771.html


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Environment at the WTO
------------------------------------------------------------------------

WTO NEGOTIATIONS SPEED UP IN LEAD-UP TO CANCUN

>From 10-14 September WTO Members will meet in Cancun, Mexico, for the fifth
WTO Ministerial Conference to take stock of the current round of trade
negotiations launched in Doha, Qatar, in November 2001. Environment- and
biodiversity-related issues explicitly feature within the negotiating
mandate of the Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE), but are also folded
into other negotiating areas, including agriculture, fisheries, intellectual
property rights and possible negotiations on the 'Singapore Issues'
(investment, competition, transparency in government procurement and trade
facilitation).

Heads of Delegation are currently meeting every morning with the Chair of
the General Council, Ambassador Perez del Castillo of Uruguay, to discuss
items included in the draft Ministerial text. Smaller groups are meeting
during afternoons and nights and some WTO Members have tabled key proposals.
On discussions related to environment and biodiversity, negotiations have
mainly focused on issues related to the observer status of multilateral
environmental agreement (MEA) Secretariats, agriculture and fisheries. There
have been no recent developments in the other negotiating areas related to
environment and biodiversity, including the relationship between the
Convention on Biological Diversity and the Agreement on Trade-related
Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, eco-labelling and the effects of
environmental measures on market access.

Informal environment discussions focus on observership

On 23 August, WTO Members met informally to further discuss the status of
observership of MEA Secretariats and a few international organisations to
attend special (negotiating) sessions of the CTE (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes,
11 July 2003, http://www.ictsd.org/biores/03-07-11/story3.htm). The EC
proposed to invite UNEP, UNCTAD, the Basel Convention, the UNFCCC, the
Montreal Protocol, CBD, CITES and the International Tropical Timber
Organization (ITTO) to special sessions of the CTE. Several countries,
including the US, Japan, Switzerland and Norway, supported the EC proposal.
However, in particular developing countries, including Egypt, China,
Malaysia, the Philippines and Indonesia, continue to oppose a permanent
invitation and would instead prefer to extend invitations to the
organisations on a flexible basis just prior to the CTE meetings. Members
did not reach an agreement on the EC proposal. Similarly, the systemic
decision on observership remains stuck at the level of the Trade
Negotiations Committee.

Agriculture negotiations move forward

A second draft Cancun Ministerial text was circulated on 24 August,
including a new Annex setting out a framework for establishing agriculture
modalities. The draft Annex aims to strike a balance between the generally
conservative EC-US 'joint text' and a counter proposal by twelve developing
countries from the Cairns Group plus China, India, Mexico, Venezuela and
Peru, which are more supportive of agricultural liberalisation albeit with
significantly easier conditions for developing countries.

The draft Annex notes that developing countries "shall benefit from special
and differential treatment, including lower tariff reductions and longer
implementation periods". The text also includes references to 'special
products', which would be subject to a linear cut (to be determined). The
text would also set up a special agricultural safeguard for use by
developing countries. Non-trade concerns (NTCs), which include, for
instance, biodiversity conservation, landscape preservation and other
aspects of rural environmental management, are mentioned in the text, but
without specific details.

The concept of 'special products' is being strongly advocated by a group of
six like-minded countries, including the Dominican Republic, Honduras,
Kenya, Nicaragua, Panama and Sri Lanka, which would like such products to be
exempted from tariff reduction commitments. The group of six has proposed
that developing countries should be able to self-designate an [unspecified]
percentage of tariff lines as special products, which would be exempt from
tariff cuts. The EC-US text also proposes a special agricultural safeguard
mechanism for use by developing countries "as regards import-sensitive
tariff lines".

The EC-US text acknowledged the trading blocks' failure to agree on the
issue of NTCs. Like Japan, Korea, Norway and Switzerland, the EC is part of
the 'Friends of Multifunctionality', which maintains that support for
legitimate NTCs, such as the environmental and social roles of agriculture,
should be exempt from reduction commitments. Submissions from Japan, Norway
and Switzerland (on behalf Bulgaria, Chinese Taipei, Iceland, Korea,
Liechtenstein) regretted that NTCs were not addressed in the EC-US paper,
and indicated that they would be able to show more flexibility in subsidy
reduction if such concerns were taken into account. These countries would
prefer negotiations to be less ambitious than proposed by the EC-US and by
Cairns et al, especially in the areas of market access and in reducing
domestic support.

Group of developing countries submit joint fisheries proposal

The WTO Negotiating Group on Rules met, from 21-22 July to consider, inter
alia, a submission on fisheries subsidies by a group of small island and
coastal states, including Antigua, Barbuda, Belize, Fiji Islands, Guyana,
the Maldives, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, St. Kitts and Nevis
(TN/RL/W/136, searchable at http://docsonline.wto.org/).

The proposal -- the first of its kind in the fisheries negotiations from a
cohesive group of developing countries -- advocates for exceptions from
fisheries disciplines relevant to small fishery-dependent states, following
a background paper by the of 'Friends of Fish' group (see BRIDGES Trade
BioRes, 30 June 2003, http://www.ictsd.org/biores/03-06-30/story4.htm).
Specifically, the proposal aims to address the sustainable development
concerns of small vulnerable states -- noting the relatively high dependence
of their populations on fisheries -- and to operationalise proposals on
special and differential treatment (S&D) for developing countries in this
area. It outlines three categories of fisheries activities relevant to the
small coastal states: revenue generation from access fees for distant water
fleets; domestic and foreign fishers operating for export in the waters of
the small coastal states; and artisan fishery operations for both domestic
and export markets.

At the meeting, New Zealand, Australia, the EC, Barbados and Japan supported
the inclusion of a development dimension in the talks. The US and Mauritius
expressed their interest in working along the lines of the proposal.
Australia, on the other hand, felt more appropriate ways of dealing with S&D
existed than through the focus on subsidy definitions. This meeting was the
final scheduled session of the Negotiating Group prior to the Cancun
Ministerial meeting.

Additional Resources

For the latest news, resources, events and logistical information around the
Cancun meeting, see http://www.ictsd.org/ministerial/index.htm.

For a more in-depth account of the agriculture negotiations, see BRIDGES
Weekly, 21 August 2003, http://www.ictsd.org/weekly/03-08-21/story2.htm; and
the forthcoming issue of BRIDGES Monthly,
http://www.ictsd.org/monthly/index.htm.

For a more in-depth account of the fisheries negotiations, see BRIDGES
Weekly, 28 July 2003, http://www.ictsd.org/weekly/03-07-28/story6.htm.

ICTSD reporting.




------------------------------------------------------------------------
Biotechnology
------------------------------------------------------------------------

GMO UPDATE: US-EU, CHINA, AFRICA

US requests WTO panel in US-EU biotech dispute

The US at the 18 August meeting of the WTO Dispute Settlement Body (DSB)
requested the establishment of a panel to rule on its complaint against the
EU's de facto moratorium on the approval of new genetically modified
organisms (GMOs, see BRIDGES Weekly, 15 May 2003,
http://www.ictsd.org/biores/03-05-15/story1.htm). The US is also challenging
a number of marketing and import bans in certain EU member states, including
Austria, France, Greece and Italy where the importation and marketing of GM
products is prohibited although they have been approved for sale in the EU.
Panel requests were also submitted by Argentina, a third party to the US
case, and Canada, which is initiating a separate dispute. The US asked that
the complaints be assessed by a single panel.

The requests mark the end of the consultations initiated in May. According
to US Ambassador Linnet Deily, the consultations had proven inconclusive and
the EU had not offered "any scientific justification for its measure". The
EU, in contrast, contended that it had been prepared to continue the
consultation process, but that "to the EU's dismay" the US had declared the
failure of the consultations and had immediately submitted its panel
request. The EU continues to insist that its measures are justified under
international law, citing inter alia the recently adopted Codex risk
analysis principles (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 11 July 2003,
http://www.ictsd.org/biores/03-07-11/inbrief.htm) and the precautionary
approach provided for in the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (to enter into
force on 11 September) in support of its measures.

The EU has blocked the first request and the US has asked the issue to be
placed on the agenda of the 29 August DSB meeting -- just prior to the fifth
WTO Ministerial meeting in Cancun -- where a second panel request is
expected to be made. Under WTO rules, a panel will automatically be
established once the second request has been received.

In related developments, the European regulations on traceability and
labelling of genetically modified food and feed received the final nod from
the European Council of Ministers on 22 July after having been adopted by
the European Parliament on 2 July (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 11 July 2003,
http://www.ictsd.org/biores/03-07-11/story1.htm). The regulations were
approved with all the amendments proposed by the Parliament, including
language to allow EU member states to impose "appropriate measures" to avoid
the unintended presence of GMOs in other products ("co-existence").
Luxembourg, the UK and Denmark voted against the regulations. The
legislation will enter into force 20 days after publication in the Official
Journal of the EU. Operators have to comply with the new previsions on
labelling within six months of the date of publication. While the European
Commission has repeatedly said that the de facto moratorium on the approval
of new GMOs would be lifted once the regulations entered into force, it
remains unclear whether the US and others would drop their WTO challenge
even if approvals resumed.

The European Commission on 23 July released Guidelines for the development
of national strategies and best practices to ensure the co-existence of GM
crops with conventional and organic farming. Civil society groups have
criticised the EU in the past for leaving co-existence to be dealt with at
the national level, calling instead for the establishment of "clear and
coherent" legislation at the EU-level (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 10 March
2003, http://www.ictsd.org/biores/03-03-10/story1.htm).

GMO debate heating up in China

The debate around GMOs and biotech food in China appears to be heating up in
recent weeks. Inspections of Chinese supermarkets got underway in early
August to ensure that GM foods are properly labelled in compliance with the
interim biotech rules that came into effect in March 2002 and have recently
been extended until April 2004 (BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 2 June 2003,
http://www.ictsd.org/biores/03-06-02/story2.htm). The inspections have
focused on edible oils, most of which are produced with GM ingredients. To
assess GM content, inspectors are tracing the raw materials or testing the
sample. Traders from the US, Argentina and Brazil remain concerned about
China's import regime for soybeans following verbal notifications by embassy
officials that China was planning new restrictions.

In related developments, food producers in China have for the first time
publicly committed themselves to not selling GM foods. In a formal statement
to Greenpeace China, 32 companies, including Lipton, Wrigley, Wyeth and Mead
Johnson announced that they would not use GM ingredients in products sold in
China.

The company Shanghia Nestle Co and a local supermarket have recently come
under attack for not labelling GM foods. Zhu Yanling sued Nestle for not
labelling its Nesquik instant chocolate drink as a GM food and is seeking
13.6 yuan (USD 1.64) in compensation -- twice as much as he spent on the
drink. "We are fighting for the right to be informed whether the food is
genetically modified or not," said Wu Dong, Zhu's attorney. "The customers
should have the right to select what kind of food they like."

NEPAD to establish biotech advisory panel

The New Partnership for African Development (NEPAD) is planning to set up an
advisory panel on biotechnology and biosafety in an effort to develop an
African strategy on biotechnology. The panel, which would bring together
scientists, representatives from civil society, industry, senior policy
makers and opinion leaders, would also aim to harmonise biosafety
regulations across the continent to facilitate trade. "If Africa doesn't
make a decision, it is going to remain caught between the US and European
positions," said John Mugabe, NEPAD's Science and Technology Advisor and one
of the panel's architects. The establishment of the panel still requires
approval by NEPAD's steering committee. This initiative would complement
other regional efforts already underway in Africa, including a decision by
the Southern African Development Community (SADC) to set up an Advisory
Committee on GMOs in October 2002, and efforts to develop a regional GMO
policy for member states of the Common Market for Eastern and Southern
Africa (COMESA) launched in November 2002.

Additional Resources

For further information on the US-EU dispute, see
http://www.ictsd.org/issarea/environment/biotech_case.htm.

The EU co-existence guidelines are available at
http://europa.eu.int/comm/agriculture/publi/reports/coexistence2/index_en.ht
m.

ICTSD reporting; "European legislative framework for GMOs is now in place,"
EU PRESS RELEASE, 22 July 2003; GMOs: Commission publishes recommendations
to ensure co-existence of GM and non-GM crop," EU PRESS RELEASE, 23 July
2003;  "U.S. to Secure WTO Panel To Rule on EU GMO Restrictions," WTO
REPORTER, 20 August 2003; "European Commission regrets the request for a WTO
panel on GMOs," EC PRESS RELEASE, 18 August 2003; "Food firms pledge to keep
Chinese products GE free," ENS, 22 July 2003; "GM food fight to heat up in
China," SHANGHAI DAILY, 29 July 2003; "Chinese inspectors check GM foods,"
CHECKBIOTECH, 12 August 2003; "Nepad to set up advisory panel on biosafety,"
AGBIOS, 24 July 2003.



-------------- nächster Teil --------------
Ein Dateianhang mit HTML-Daten wurde geschreddert...
URL: http://ilpostino.jpberlin.de/pipermail/info-mail/attachments/20030827/056ed36e/attachment-0001.htm