The Group of 33 (G-33), at its initial establishment known as the ?SP and SSM Alliance?, is a negotiating group of developing countries established on 9 September 2003, on the eve of the WTO Fifth Ministerial Conference in Cancun, Mexico. Its main and strategic objective is to ensure that the issue of food security, rural livelihood and rural development becomes an integral part of the agriculture negotiations - the ?engine? and central issue of the WTO Doha Development Agenda.  

 

It endeavours to do so, under the coordination of Indonesia, by vigorously promoting Special and Differential Treatment through the concept of Special Products (SP) and Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM) for all developing countries. The goal of G-33 is to have the concepts of SP and SSM embodied within the modalities of the WTO agriculture negotiations.

 

The existence and role of the G-33 in the agriculture negotiations has brought new interests, challenges and hope. It has also provoked mutual respect as well as fierce criticism and oppositions not only from negotiating partners but from analysts as well. However, the Group remained solid and determined since it believes that addressing the problem of food and livelihood security as well as rural development constitutes a concrete expression of developing countries? ?right to development?.

 
Since the WTO Fifth Ministerial Conference and significantly leading up to the 2004 July Package, the G-33 progressed consistently with their ultimate agenda of SP and SSM. A premeditated Ministerial Meeting was held in Jakarta (June 2004), which adopted a common political platform enshrined in the G-33 Ministerial Communique.   A Ministerial informal consultation has also been convened in Dalian, China (July 2005). On a more regular basis, Senior Officials, Heads of Delegations and technical level meetings are continuously held in Geneva to discuss, consolidate and materialize the Group?s concerted efforts.

The concepts of SP and SSM as provided for in the July 2004 Framework are fundamental and are key policy instruments for securing the survival of the vast number of small farmers and the rural poor. In accordance with the July 2004 Framework, developing countries will designate an appropriate number of SPs, considered as being strategic, on the basis of food security, livelihood security and rural development needs. Acknowledging the complex nature of these concepts it is undoubtedly not feasible for the establishment of universal indicator for SPs. The selection and designation of an appropriate number of SPs must be made with a full appreciation of the domestic policy context and circumstances of individual developing countries concerned.

 

The SSM is equally important for attaining the development objectives of developing countries. SSM is needed to provide more operationally effective remedy for developing countries against import surges and price depressions. In line with the July framework, the SSM shall be available to all developing countries. As a safeguard mechanism for developing countries, the SSM must be able to respond to the needs and the particular circumstances of individual developing countries and LDCs. Therefore, this mechanism must take into account their institutional capacities and resources and thus must be simple, effective and easy to implement.

 

It is apparent that the G-33 upholds its legitimacy due to the following rational:

  

a)       Agricultural sectors in most of the developing world, in particular their ability to support their basic legitimate development goals, such as food and livelihood security and rural development, have been affected by the inequalities inherent to the current Agreement;

 

b)       Since the Uruguay Round, farmers from most of the developing countries have had to compete in their domestic markets with foreign competitors who are supported by both trade-distorting export competition and by domestic support measures; 

 

c)       The fact that rural and agricultural populations typically predominate in the societies and economies of developing countries, the latter?s agricultural systems and economies suffer from undue stress imposed by the existing inequalities of the international trading environment. Although developing countries each have their own limited areas of competitiveness, trade distortions as well as other types of barriers have either prevented the exploitation of market access benefits or shut developing countries out of the competition altogether. The problem is compounded by the fact that even on their own markets, the producers in developing countries are facing increasingly difficult circumstances and impoverishment;

 

d)       There is indeed a need for a fundamental reform of world agricultural trade, which is seen as key to addressing the current imbalance as well as to achieving the development objectives and dimensions set out in the Doha Development Agenda.  For developing countries, these reforms must comprise reductions of, with a view to phasing out all forms of export subsidies, substantial reductions in trade-distorting domestic support and substantial improvements in market access for products of particular interest to developing countries. Any reform to be viable, special and differential treatment for developing countries must be an integral part of all elements of the negotiations in order to be operational. This would also enable them to effectively take account of their development needs, amongst them food and livelihood security, as well as rural development.

 

 

As a logical consequence, the G-33 confirms that for the SP and SSM provision to become effective in addressing food and livelihood security as well as rural development, must imply the following characteristics:

 

a)    SP is a stand alone provision, and not merely recognize as an additional flexibility or linked to any part of market access reduction formula; 

b)     No tariff reduction commitment for all SP;

c)     No new TRQ commitment on all SP;

d)     Products designated as SP must have access to SSM;

e)     Indicators based on food security, livelihood security, and rural development needs, not to be negotiated but as a way of transparency, will be produced to assist developing countries to designate their own special products;

f)      SP shall be available to all agricultural products;

g)     SSM shall be automatically triggered;

h)     SSM shall be available to all agricultural products;

i)     SSM should be available to address situations of import surges or swings in international prices. Therefore, price and volume-triggered safeguards shall be contemplated;

j)    Both additional duties and quantitative restrictions shall be envisaged as measures to provide relief from import surges and decline in prices;

k)    The mechanism shall respond to the institutional capabilities and resources of developing countries; hence it should be simple, effective and easy to implement.

 

The distinctive negotiating role of the G-33 was also evident in the final phase of the negotiations that led to the agreed July Framework in 2004. Within the roadmap leading up to the Sixth WTO Hong Kong Ministerial Conference in December 2005 and the conclusion of the Development Round in 2006, the G-33 is committed to pursue its common objectives and engage constructively in the negotiations. The Group would maintain and continue to fostering its internal coordination and close cooperation with other developing country groupings, such as the G-20, the ACP, the African Group and LDCs.

 

Currently, the G-33, an alliance of a large number of developing countries including LDCs across the continents, has 44 member countries as follows:

 

Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Belize, Benin, Botswana, China, Cote d?Ivoire, Congo, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Kenya, Korea, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mongolia, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Panama, The Philippines, Peru, Saint Kitts, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Senegal, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Tanzania, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Uganda, Venezuela, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. El Salvador and Guatemala joined as the most recent members, in August 2005.