The four pillars of South African agricultural trade policy

Transcription

1 The four pillars of South African agricultural trade policy by Ron Sandrey tralac Trade Brief No TB08/2007 November 2007

2 Copyright tralac, 2007 Readers are encouraged to quote and reproduce this material for educational, non-profit purposes, provided the source is acknowledged. All views and opinions expressed remain solely those of the authors and do not purport to reflect the views of tralac This publication should be cited as: Sandrey, R The four pillars of South African agricultural trade policy. tralac Trade Brief No. TB08/2007.

3 1 Abstract This paper explores the concept of placing South African agricultural trade policies into four pillars. These pillars are unilateral (what you do yourself), bilateral (between you and another party directly), regional (what happens between a group), and multilateral (what happens when all parties are involved). The first section of the paper puts these pillars in perspective. The second section examines future developments in the four pillars. This examination makes use of a global computer model. South African agricultural trade data and an analysis of that data are provided in an Annex. Introduction In discussing the trade policy regime for South African agriculture it is useful to place these policies into a framework. That framework is to use a four pillars approach, and these four pillars of trade policy are: Unilateral (what South Africa does to its own policies); Bilateral (what arrangements it may make between South Africa and selected partners such as the EU and the TDCA); Regional (the SACU and SADC dimension, for example); and Multilateral (with the World Trade Organisation (WTO) as the main example). However, within this framework it can become a little difficult to see where the exact boundaries are. For instances, under the 2002 SACU Agreement, South Africa is expected to liaise with the so-called BLNS countries (Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia and Swaziland) on trade policies, and this blurs unilateral policies on one end of the spectrum and bilateral and regional issues towards the other end. Nonetheless the pillars give a useful framework to evaluate trade policies, although one needs to always consider that trade policies cannot be viewed in isolation from other policy changes taking place both within the sector and outside the sector with respect to flanking policies such as competition policies, for example.

4 2 The objective of this paper is to briefly put these four pillars in perspective and then look at what they may individually and collectively mean for South Africa s way ahead. The paper draws heavily from the recent tralac book of the same name, South Africa s way ahead? trade policy options (Sandrey et al. 2007). Section 1 the pillars Unilateral policies Sandrey and Vink (2006) outline many of the salient features relating to changes in South Africa s agricultural and agricultural trade policies. South African farm policy changed emphatically in the period around 1980, although some of the policy shifts were initially quite gradual. The process started outside the sector itself, with extensive liberalisation of the financial sector that changed the external value of the currency and the interest cost of farm borrowings. For the sector itself, the strong indicator of the extent to which agricultural policies in South Africa have been reformed, is the declining levels of the Producer Support Estimates (PSE), a measure that can be interpreted as the percentage of total agricultural returns to the sector or sub-sector that comes from taxpayers in the form of either direct or indirect support measures. The recent Organisation for Economic and Cooperation Development (OECD) report shows that the PSE for South Africa averaged a low 5 percent in 2002/03, and these reductions came about as supports were stripped from the sector from 1994/95 to the end of the 1990s. A major contributor to this was the deregulation of trade policies as border tariffs reduced and export subsidies were eliminated, although this was balanced by the introduction of tariff rate quota (TRQ) regimes for several products. The three other major reforms impacting upon agriculture during the late 1990s and early 2000s were (a) the reforms of marketing institutions, (b) changes to labour policy, and (c) the post-apartheid land reform initiatives. South Africa now has a very lightly protected agricultural sector. Bilateral policies The Trade, Development and Cooperation Agreement (TDCA) for merchandise trade between South Africa and the EU entered into force on 1 January It has a

5 3 transition period of twelve years for South Africa and ten years for the EU that will eventually lead to much of the trade becoming duty-free. Exceptions to this are concentrated in agricultural imports into the EU (and motor vehicles imports into South Africa), and by year 9 high duties into the EU will almost exclusively remain on agricultural products and fish. Demonstrating the blur between bilateral and regional policies the agreement does not technically cover imports from the European Union (EU) into BLNS the other Southern African Customs Union (SACU) countries, although it does de facto mostly apply to their imports from the EU. Even though South Africa was a member of SACU at the time of entering into negotiations with the EU, it chose to do so alone and not to include the BLNS countries. At the halfway point of the TDCA implementation the data shows that South African imports from the EU have been trending downwards in recent years but the EU remains the main source of imports into the Republic. Similarly, the EU remains the main overall destination for South African exports and the share has remained very stable over the implementation period. Analysis undertaken by tralac shows very little evidence that the reductions in EU tariffs have been beneficial to South African exports to date. Regional policies The SACU 2002 Agreement updates the earlier agreement, and formalises the processes necessary to conduct a Customs Union in the 21 st century. Its objective is to facilitate trade between members by adopting common policies and strategies, especially the development of common industrial and agricultural policies 1 and the recognition of the importance of the tariff as an instrument of industrial development policy. This includes the distribution of monies from the common tariff revenue pool, and this distribution contains a large element of an aid grant from South Africa to the BLNS countries. In effect, South Africa is much more constrained now in its unilateral actions, further blurring the boundaries between the four pillars. 1 SACU Agreement, Article 39 Agricultural Policy 1. Member States recognize the importance of the agricultural sector to their economics. 2. Member States agree to co-operate on agricultural policies in order to ensure the coordinated development of the agricultural sector within the Common Customs Area.

6 4 SADC 2 currently has a membership of 14 countries, and is ostensibly working towards a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) by 1 January To date, any sign of meeting that deadline is decidedly one-sided. At this stage only SACU (which has duty-free access for all SADC imports except used clothes and motor vehicles) has made a definite policy change or even really shown any inclination towards the FTA deadline. In other regional agreements, negotiations commenced in December 2002 for a South Africa/Brazil FTA, but the framework was later expanded to include the other SACU and Mercosur members for a preferential trade agreement. The SACU- Mercosur agreement was signed in December 2004 and was the first agreement that SACU negotiated in accordance with the provisions of the 2002 SACU Agreement. The agreement is currently awaiting ratification, but in its present form it is a rather meaningless document as it covers very few trade lines that are important. The SACU-EFTA (Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland) agreement was signed in 2005 and has been ratified by the South African Parliament but awaits ratification in other SACU member states. The agreement was tentatively scheduled for implementation no later than 1 January 2007 after ratification by the Rest of SACU by end of 2006, and was expected to be phased-in over a period of 10 years. In due course, the agreement will allow substantially all trade to move duty-free between SACU and EFTA (except of course access to most of the sensitive agricultural markets in EFTA that would potentially benefit South Africa). Multilateral policies South Africa was a founding member of the World trade Organisation (WTO) when it replaced the old GATT in The WTO deals with global rules of trade it determines and oversees the multilateral trade rules among the 151 members. The main function is to ensure that international trade flows as smoothly, freely and predictably as possible and with no undesirable side-effects. It aims to raise standards of living and ensure full employment in member states by enabling the 2 SADC comprises Angola, Botswana, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland, United Republic of Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

7 5 expansion of trade in goods and services in a sustainable manner. The Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) was an essential component of this aim as it sought to negotiate a fairer and more market-oriented trading system for agriculture. The current Doha Development Agenda (DDA) aims to continue this momentum and further open global trade across a broad front. Over three-quarters of WTO Members are developing or least-developed countries, with many of the latter situated in Africa. Developing countries are themselves not a homogeneous group, but agriculture plays an important role in most of their economies whether through exporting, rural development and/or food security. Members have recognised that liberalisation in these developing countries own markets needs to be more gradual than for developed countries the principle of special and differential treatment (S&D), while least developed countries are required to make very few adjustments. The latter comment is, however, tempered by the extent to which these least developed countries are an integral part of a common external tariff (CET) arrangement involving other developing or even least-developed countries, as in these cases some will be unable to take full advantage of the S&D provisions. Such is the case within SACU, with Botswana, Namibia and Swaziland, along with South Africa itself, developing countries, while Lesotho is a least developed country. Finally, it is important to always keep in mind that the WTO negotiates bound tariffs, or tariff rates that members have pledged not to exceed, rather than applied or what is actually levied at the border. In agriculture in particular, these bounds are often above and sometimes considerably above applied rates, thus, in practice, a reduction in bounds may make little or even no difference at the border. Critics of the WTO can rightly claim that the AoA did very little for South African or even African agriculture. The main items of export interest were either unaffected, or, as was more commonly the case for the sensitive sectors, the developed countries largely avoided having to make meaningful policy changes for these products. This has led to disillusionment bordering on resentment within many African circles about the WTO in general, and especially so when actual or potential

8 6 economic rents face reductions from preference erosion. However, those critics, while at face value having a valid point of view, miss the bigger picture. That picture is that the AoA set up the mechanism for comprehensive reform of global agricultural production and trade, and there is a very real (but not guaranteed) prospect of that happening under the auspices of the DDA. Section 2 way ahead? Unilateral As discussed above, South Africa has very little protection for its agricultural sector. Domestic supports are low, and the remaining border tariffs are concentrated in only a few sectors. In this austere policy environment, rather than reducing the remaining protection to agriculture there is some support for the concept of actually increasing these supports, and especially under the umbrella of increasing border protection. To assess the implications of South Africa actually increasing this border protection, tralac undertook the analysis of assessing the impacts of raising all agricultural tariffs by a uniform 25 percentage points. Overall, the welfare results were positive for South Africa to the extent of an increase of $51 million at 2015 despite a reduction in allocative efficiency in the South African economy. Most agricultural production activities increased, while trade flows of both exports and imports declined as more domestic production was used locally. On the face of it, this move is marginally welfare-enhancing for South Africa and South African agriculture. This outcome, however, is very sensitive to the assumptions used about South Africa s ability to obtain a slightly higher price for its reduced exports on the global market, and if the Armington elasticity s governing this are increased, the welfare gain turns into a welfare loss of $73 million. The problem arises when the policy space available to make these changes is considered. Here we find that the combination of breached WTO bound tariffs, the lower and similarly bound WTO in-quota tariff rates and bilateral tariff preferences negotiated with the EU and non-sacu SADC members mean that there is little or no policy space available to make these changes except in wheat, possibly other grains

9 7 (maize), vegetable oil seeds (an import that is used as feedstuff in the domestic chicken sector), poultry and pork. While this lack of space and the downstream effects of increasing input costs need to be further considered at a more detailed level, it appears that the limited policy space available will restrict South Africa s abilities to unilaterally raise border protection for the agricultural sector. Thus, to the extent that it is seriously considered, any future support to the sector would need to be challenged through policy measures other than border protection. South Africa has plenty of policy space to raise domestic supports, and the constraints here are domestic budgetary ones. Careful targeting of such support to perhaps support emerging farmers would be needed to ensure that any such support meets standards of economic efficiency demanded in a modern economy while considering the equity considerations implied. Bilateral and regional policies Given the blurring between these two pillars now that SACU must be consulted before any new agreements can be considered by South Africa, it is perhaps best to merge the two pillars. The analysis presented below is drawn directly from Sandrey et al. (2007) in seeking the way ahead. The TDCA The results from a computer simulation of the TDCA suggest that, with these results expressed in US$ million as one-off increases in annual welfare at the assessed end point of 2015, South Africa s gains are $317 million, a figure much lower than the EU s $540 million. Thus, overall the TDCA agreement is good for both main parties. In the agricultural sector, South Africa increases exports to the EU by $177 million, with some $148 million of this agricultural trade new trade rather than trade merely being diverted from other markets to the EU 3. Of the total increase, almost all is in the vegetables, fruit and nuts sector, milk products, other food and beverages, and 3 Economists talk about trade creation and trade diversion. Trade creation is new trade that results from a change in policy such as a free trade agreement. Trade diversion is the substitution of imports away from an old source and towards the new source on the basis of tariff preferences being granted. In general, trade creation is good while trade diversion can be bad news.

10 8 tobacco. This is to be expected, as it is only in these sectors that we have a combination of (a) a reduction in EU tariffs and (b) anything approaching an export base to start with. For imports, there is marginal increase in South African imports from the EU of $128 million ($64 million in other foods and $23 million in dairy products). As some of this is trade being sourced from the EU rather than from other import sources, the overall change in agricultural imports is a lesser $78 million. A full SACU/EU FTA The next step is to examine the welfare and trade implications of moving to comprehensive tariff- (and quota-) free merchandise trade between the parties. We are, in effect, examining what is left on the table for tariff-only negotiations for a full FTA past the TDCA full implementation. The increase in annual welfare is South Africa s gains of $1,134 million, a vastly different outcome from the EU s loss of $369 million. Given that post-tdca the only real protection in the EU faced by South African imports are in the agricultural sector, the big increases as expected are in South Africa agricultural exports to the EU. These increase by some $985 million (out of a total increase in exports to the EU of $1,328 million). Most of the South African growth is in exports of beef and sheepmeat as the EU tariffs decline from 69.5 percent to zero, and almost all of this is new trade (trade creation). Vegetables and fruit are the next biggest winners, followed by dairy products, other foods, and beverages, and tobacco. For imports there is marginal increase from the EU of $148 million that contributes to the overall change in agricultural imports of $178 million. Overall, this is a considerable result for South African agriculture. SACU, India and Brazil (the IBSA FTA) Here the results for the agricultural sector are modest. Initial agricultural products have played a very minor part of South Africa s exports into India s heavily protected market, while agricultural imports from India are concentrated in the duty-free imports of rice. Brazil has become a major global player in agricultural exports, and sends large quantities of soya bean products and poultry meats, pork and beef to South

11 9 Africa. Following the FTA, South Africa increases exports to India by $182 million and Brazil by an insignificant $7 million. Overall, some $140 million of the increase is trade diversion from previous destinations, and therefore South African agricultural imports increase by only $44 million overall. Increases are in vegetable oils and fats ($68 million) and wool ($30 million) to India. For imports, there is a slightly larger overall increase in agricultural imports of $92 million, driven mostly by increased imports from Brazil of $76 million (other crops, other meats and vegetable oils and fats). China In the agricultural sector South Africa increases exports to China by $103 million, and importantly, there is only trade diversion of some $30 million from other destinations. Thus, some $74 million of this agricultural trade is new trade. Of the total increase, most is in other crops ($20 million) and sugar ($23 million), while there are small global reductions in vegetables and fruit in particular. For imports, there is marginal increase in South African imports from China of $14 million ($6 million in beverages and tobacco) that leads to the overall change in agricultural imports of $17 million. Japan In agriculture, South African exports of mainly corn (maize) and other foods increase, and, as expected, there is almost no change in agricultural imports (only $22 million). Overall, exports increase in agriculture by $217 million, but some $63 million is trade diverted from other markets. The increase in agricultural exports to Japan is muted by the special arrangements made for sugar which means that this sector does not feature through the GTAP model. The highly protected Japanese agricultural sector has not featured in any trade liberalisation arrangement that Japan has made to date (including the one with Singapore, a small island nation with virtually no domestic agricultural sector at all), and Japan maintains an intractable position on agricultural liberalisation in all international forums including the WTO. Thus, obtaining agricultural concessions from Japan may be difficult, but in areas such as sugar not entirely inconceivable

12 The US 10 In the agricultural sector South Africa increases exports to US by $75 million, and, importantly, there is only trade diversion of some $28 million from other destinations. Thus, some $47 million of this agricultural trade is new trade. Of the total increase, it is virtually all in sugar ($31 million) and oil seeds ($22 million). For imports, there is marginal increase in South African imports from the US of $45 million ($12 million in other foods, $12 million in other meats poultry, $12 million in other foods and $8 million in other crops). These new imports lead to the overall change in agricultural imports of a lesser $26 million once trade diversion is taken into account. Multilateral the DDA outcome The tralac computer analysis undertaken on FTA options facing South Africa was extended to an analysis of a likely DDA outcome. Here the global welfare gains from Doha are estimated to be some $48.2 billion, with a lesser $3.3 billion of this from agricultural reform and the greater $45 billion from the liberalisation of markets for non-agricultural goods. South Africa gains some $223 million, with $37 million of this from agricultural reform and the remainder from non-agricultural reforms. The big gainers are China, Japan, EU and the Rest of the World, while the US suffers a loss in welfare. Botswana has a loss in welfare of some $12 million, while the Rest of SACU aggregation of Lesotho, Namibia and Swaziland gains by $20 million. These results are consistent with those presented in recent analyses, and reinforce the fact that the shielding of some sensitive and special products considerably reduces the global gains from agricultural liberalisation. By product, the gainers in South Africa are the beef and sheep meat and dairy products sectors where output and consequently exports increase. Production and trade in the wheat and sugar sectors decline (where South Africa largely chose to utilise its protective flexibility in the sugar sector). Beef exports to the EU and Rest of the World are the big export gainers. There is a very slight increase in agricultural imports.

13 References 11 Sandrey, R. & Vink, N How can South Africa exploit new opportunities in agricultural export markets? Lessons from the New Zealand experience. tralac Working Paper No 19. Stellenbosch: US Printers. Sandrey, R., Jensen, H.G., Vink, N. and Fundira, T South Africa's way ahead? trade policy options. tralac publication. Stellenbosch: US Printers. tralac.

14 12 Table 1: Main agricultural imports at detailed level, R million HS 6 Description All agriculture 7,837 9,231 9,797 15,371 16,770 16, Rice ,213 1,303 1, Wheat ,249 1, Whiskies Soya bean oilcake , Chicken cuts Palm oil Prepared food Soybean oil Cotton Tobacco Sugar confectionery Source: World Trade Atlas Table 2: Agricultural imports by source, 2005 Source Imports Rm % share Average duty % Main imports Second All agriculture 2, % wheat rice chicken Third EU % whiskies food preps drink flavour Mercosur % chicken soy oilcake soya oil SADC % cotton tobacco tea USA % wheat ethyl alcohol food preps China % animal guts dried peas fruit juice India % rice veg. extract tobacco Japan % seed, etc drink flavour food preps Middle East % bread, etc Nuts, etc preserve fruit Rest world % rice palm oil wheat Source: World Trade Atlas and tralac calculations

15 13 Table 3: Fastest growing imports, $m and annual % growth 2005 over 1996 HS code Description Imports 1996 Imports 2005 Growth % $m $m Whiskies Soybean cake Chicken cuts Palm oil Food preparations Soya bean oil Tobacco Sugar confectionery Pork Animal feeds Soya bean oil Waters Black tea Rum Cocoa preparations Barley Turkey cuts Source: World Trade Atlas, tralac calculations

16 Table 4: South African agricultural trade by TREC definitions, US $m Exports $m Imports $m TRECC Description change chang e Live animals, chiefly for food % % Cereal grains % % Vegetables fresh or chilled % % Fruit and nuts (excluding oil nuts) fresh or dried , % % Dairy products % % Other unprocessed food % % Hides and skins (excl furskins), raw % % Furskins, raw % % Unprocessed textile fibres and wastes % % Crude materials not elsewhere specified % % Subtotal Unprocessed primary 1, , % % 14 Meat and meat preparations % % Dairy Products % % Eggs, not in shell (liquid or dried) % % Cereal Preparations % % Fruit and vegetable preparations % % Sugar, honey, coffee, cocoa confectionery % % Edible animal/vegetable oils, fats and waxes % % Preparations food, beverage & tobacco % % Raw hides % % Textile fibres % % Inedible animal/vegetable oils, fats and waxes % % Subtotal Processed primary 1, , % 1, , % Chemical and chemical preparations % % Chemicals % % Total agricultural 2, , % 1, , % Source: WTA data, tralac analysis

17 15 Table 5: South African agricultural exports, 1996, 2005 & US $m HS Description Jan-Dec 1996 Jan-Dec 2005 Jan-Dec Wine Citrus fruit Cane sugar Grapes Apples Fruit, nuts, etc. prepared Corn (Maize) Fruit juice Wool Ethyl alcohol Total agriculture 2, , ,955.7 % agriculture 9.9% 8.0% 6.8% Source: World Trade Atlas Table 6: South Africa agricultural exports by destination, 1996 & 2006 US $m Destination % 1st 2nd 3rd $m $m % share Agric World 2,620 3, % 6.8 wine citrus sugar EU 926 1, % 8.2 wine grapes citrus SADC % 12.6 maize sugar cigarettes US % 3.4 citrus wine eth alcohol Japan % 2.6 citrus sugar prep fruit China % 3.8 wool sugar waste Source: World Trade Atlas

18 16 Working Papers 2002 US safeguard measures on steel imports: specific implications by Niel Joubert & Rian Geldenhuys. WP 1/2002, April A few reflections on Annex VI to the SADC Trade Protocol by Jan Bohanes WP 2/2002, August Competition policy in a regional context: a SADC perspective on trade investment & competition issues by Trudi Hartzenberg WP 3/2002, November Rules of Origin and Agriculture: some observations by Hilton Zunckel WP 4/2002, November 2003 A new anti-dumping regime for South Africa and SACU by Stuart Clark & Gerhard Erasmus WP 1/2003, May Why build capacity in international trade law? by Gerhard Erasmus WP 2/2003, May The regional integration facilitation forum: a simple answer to a complicated issue? by Henry Mutai WP 3/2003, July The WTO GMO dispute by Maxine Kennett WP 4/2003, July WTO accession by Maxine Kennett WP 5/2003, July On the road to Cancun: a development perspective on EU trade policies by Faizel Ismail WP 6/2003, August GATS: an update on the negotiations and developments of trade in services in SADC by Adeline Tibakweitira WP 7/2003, August An evaluation of the capitals control debate: is there a case for controlling capital flows in the SACU-US free trade agreement? by Calvin Manduna WP 8/2003, August Non-smokers hooked on tobacco by Calvin Manduna WP 9/2003, August Assessing the impact of trade liberalisation: the importance of policy complementarities and policy processes in a SADC context by Trudi Hartzenberg WP 10/2003, October An examination of regional trade agreements: a case study of the EC and the East African community by Jeremy Everard John Streatfeild WP 11/2003, October 16

19 17 Reforming the EU sugar regime: will Southern Africa still feature? by Daniel Malzbender WP 12/2003, October 2004 Complexities and inadequacies relating to certain provision of the General Agreement on Trade in Services by Leon Steenkamp WP 1/2004, March Challenges posed by electronic commerce to the operation and implementation of the General Agreement on Trade in Services by Leon Steenkamp WP 2/2004, March Trade liberalisation and regional integration in SADC: policy synergies assessed in an industrial organisation framework by Martine Visser and Trudi Hartzenberg WP 3/2004, March Tanzania and AGOA: opportunities missed? by Eckart Naumann and Linda Mtango WP 4/2004, March Rationale behind agricultural reform negotiations by Hilton Zunkel WP 5/2004, July The impact of US-SACU FTA negotiations on Public Health in Southern Africa by Tenu Avafia WP 6/2004, November Export Performance of the South African Automotive Industry by Mareika Meyn WP 7/2004 December 2005 Textiles and clothing: Reflections on the sector s integration into the post-quota environment by Eckart Naumann WP 1/2005, March Assessing the Causes of Sub-Saharan Africa's Declining Exports and Addressing Supply-Side Constraints by Calvin Manduna WP 2/2005, May A Few Reflections on Annex VI to the SADC Trade Protocol by Jan Bohanes WP 3/2005, June Tariff liberisation impacts of the EAC Customs Union in perspective by Heinz - Michael Stahl WP4/2005, August Trade facilitation and the WTO: A critical analysis of proposals on trade facilitation and their implications for African countries by Gainmore Zanamwe WP5/2005, September An evaluation of the alternatives and possibilities for countries in sub-saharan Africa to meet the sanitary standards for entry into the international trade in animals and animal products by Gideon K. Brückner WP 6/2005, October Dispute Settlement under COMESA by Felix Maonera WP7/2005, October 17

20 18 The Challenges Facing Least Developed Countries in the GATS Negotiations: A Case Study of Lesotho by Calvin Manduna WP8/2005. November Rules of Origin under EPAs: Key Issues and New Directions by Eckart Naumann WP9/2005, December Lesotho: Potential Export Diversification Study: July 2005 by Ron Sandrey, Adelaide Matlanyane, David Maleleka and Dirk Ernst van Seventer WP10/2005, December African Member States and the Negotiations on Dispute Settlement Reform in the World Trade Organization by Clement Ng ong ola WP11/2005, December The ability of select sub-saharan African countries to utilise TRIPs Flexibilities and Competition Law to ensure a sustainable supply of essential medicines: A study of producing and importing countries by Tenu Avafia, Jonathan Berger and Trudi Hartzenberg WP12/2006, August Intellectual Property, Education and Access to Knowledge in Southern Africa by Andrew Rens, Achal Prabhala and Dick Kawooya WP13/2006, August The Genetic Use Restriction Technologies, Intellectual Property Rights and Sustainable Development in Eastern and Southern Africa by Patricia Kameri-Mbote and James Otieno-Odek WP14/2006, August 2006 Agriculture and the World Trade Organization 10 Years On by Ron Sandrey WP1/2006, January Trade Liberalisation: What exactly does it mean for South Africa? by Ron Sandrey WP2/2006, March South African merchandise trade with China by Ron Sandrey WP3/2006, March The Multifibre Agreement WTO Agreement on Textiles and Clothing by Eckart Naumann WP4/2006, April The WTO ten years on: trade and development by Catherine Grant WP5/2006, May A review of the results of the 6 th WTO Hong Kong Ministerial Conference Considerations for African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Countries by Calvin Manduna WP6/2006, June Trade Liberalisation: What exactly does it mean for Lesotho? by Ron Sandrey, Adelaide Matlanyane and David Maleleka WP7/2006, June A possible SACU/China Free Trade Agreement (FTA): Implications for the South African manufacturing sector by Hans Grinsted Jensen and Ron Sandrey WP8/2006, July Ecolabels and fish trade: Marine Stewardship Council certification and the South African hake industry by Stefano Ponte WP9/2006, August 18

21 19 South African Merchandise Trade with India by Ron Sandrey WP10/2006, August Trade Creation and Trade Diversion Resulting from SACU trading Agreements by Ron Sandrey WP11/2006, August The ability of select sub-saharan African countries to utilise TRIPs Flexibilities and Competition Law to ensure a sustainable supply of essential medicines: A study of producing and importing countries bytenu Avafia, Jonathan Berger and Trudi Hartzenberg WP12/2006, August Intellectual Property, Education and Access to Knowledge in Southern Africa by Andrew Rens, Achal Prabhala and Dick Kawooya WP13/2006, August The Genetic Use Restriction Technologies, Intellectual Property Rights and Sustainable Development in Eastern and Southern Africa by Patricia Kameri-Mbote and James Otieno-Odek WP14/2006, August Initiation of WTO Trade Disputes by the private sector need for SADC/COMESA countries to develop national mechanisms. by Felix Maonera WP15/2006, October The Trade and Economic Implications of the South African Restrictions regime on imports of clothing from China by Ron Sandrey WP16/2006, October The Memorandum of Understanding and quotas on textile and clothing imports from China: Who wins? by Gustav Brink WP17/2006, October WTO and the Singapore Issues by Ron Sandrey WP 18/2006, November How can South Africa exploit new opportunities in agricultural export markets? Lessons from the New Zealand experience. by Ron Sandrey & Nick Vink WP 19/2006, November Promoting agricultural trade and investment synergies between South Africa and other SADC Member countries. by N. Vink, R. Sandrey, C.L. McCarthy & H.E. Zunckel WP 20/2006, November Proposed amendments to the anti-dumping regulations: are the amendments in order? by Gustav Brink WP 21/2006, November 2007 Examining the India, Brazil and South African (IBSA) Triangular Trading Relationship Ron Sandrey and Hans Jensen WP 1/2007, February Government-Business Interface in dispute settlement: Lessons for SACU Augustine Mandigora WP2/2007, February South Africa and Japan: towards a new trading relationship? Ron Sandrey WP3/2007, March 19

22 20 South African agriculture protection: how much policy space is there? Ron Sandrey, Olubukola Oyewumi, Bonani Nyhodo and Nick Vink WP4/2007, March South African agriculture: a possible WTO outcome and FTA policy space - a modelling approach. Ron Sandrey and Hans Jensen WP5/2007, March Revisiting the South African-China trading relationship Ron Sandrey WP6/2007, March Safeguards in South Africa: What Lessons from the First Investigation? Gustav Brink, G WP7/2007, May South African Wine An Industry in Ferment Stefano Ponte and Joachim Ewert WP8/2007, October Governance in the Value Chain for South African Wine Stefano Ponte WP9/2007, October Trade Briefs 2002 Cost sharing in international dispute settlement: some reflections in the context of SADC by Jan Bohanes & Gerhard Erasmus. TB 1/2002, July Trade dispute between Zambia & Zimbabwe by Tapiwa C. Gandidze. TB 2/2002, August 2003 Non-tariff barriers: the reward of curtailed freedom by Hilton Zunckel TB 1/2003, February The effects of globalization on negotiating tactics by Gerhard Erasmus & Lee Padayachee TB 2/2003, May The US-SACU FTA : implications for wheat trade by Hilton Zunckel TB 3/2003, June Memberships in multiple regional trading arrangements : legal implications for the conduct of trade negotiations by Henry Mutai TB 4/2003, August 2004 Apparel Trade and Quotas: Developments since AGOA s inception and challenges ahead by Eckart Naumann TB 1/2004, March Adequately boxing Africa in the debate on domestic support and export subsidies by Hilton E Zunckel TB 2/2004, July 20

23 Recent changes to the AGOA legislation by Eckart Naumann TB 3/2004, August Trade after Preferences: a New Adjustment Partnership? by Ron Sandrey TB1/2005, June TRIPs and Public Health: The Unresolved Debate by Tenu Avafia TB2/2005, June Daring to Dispute: Are there shifting trends in African participation in WTO dispute settlement? by Calvin Manduna TB3/2005, June South Africa s Countervailing Regulations by Gustav Brink TB4/2005, August Trade and competitiveness in African fish exports: Impacts of WTO and EU negotiations and regulation by Stefano Ponte, Jesper Raakjær Nielsen, & Liam Campling TB5/2005, September Geographical Indications: Implications for Africa by Catherine Grant TB6/November 2006 Southern Africa and the European Union: the TDCA and SADC EPA by Catherine Grant TB1/2006, May Safeguarding South Africa s clothing, textile and footwear industries by Gustav Brink TB2/2006, May Agricultural Safeguards in South Africa by Gustav Brink TB3/2006, May The WTO Trade Policy Review Mechanism: application and benefit to SACU by Paul Kruger TB4/2006, June Amendment to TRIPs agreement: consensus or dissension? by Madalitso Mutuwazovu Mmeta TB5/2006, September 2007 Southern Africa and the trading relationship with the European Union Ron Sandrey and Taku Fundira TB1/2007, January The development pillar of the EPA negotiation Catherine Grant TB2/2007, February The use and limitations of computer models in assessing trade policy Ron Sandrey TB3/2007, March 21

24 Competition and infant industry protection within SACU: the case of UHT milk in Namibia Omu Kakujaha-Matundu TB4/2007, March 22 Sunset Reviews in South Africa: New Direction given by the High Court Gustav Brink TB5/2007, July South African quotas on Chinese clothing and textiles: has there been sufficient economic justification? Johann van Eeden and Ron Sandrey TB6/2007, September Sunset reviews in South Africa: how long is five years? Gustav Brink TB7/2007, November The four pillars of South African agricultural trade policy Ron Sandrey TB8/2007, November 22