WTO Doha Round: Japan’s

Position

North America and Global Economy CPL2 561 781

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 Anti-dumping

Agriculture: Position

Doha's Official Ministerial Declaration Japan's unyielding position Prime importance of multi-benefits of

agriculture for the country

Agriculture: Analysis

The world's biggest net importer

-20.00-10.00

0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.00

Billion $

1

Countries/Groups

Net Agricultural Import of the World's 5 Largest Agricultural Importers, 2003

EU (25 countries)

USA

Japan

China

Canada

Figure 2.017,18

Agriculture: Analysis

Concentration of food production

Japanese Market Shares of Top 5 Agricultural Products Suppliers, 2003

28%

12%

11%8%7%

34%

United States China European Union (15) Canada Australia Others

Figure 2.119

Agriculture: Analysis

Central Union of Agricultural Cooperatives' lobby

Services: Maximizing trade liberalization

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

Amount in B$

Export

Import

Net Import

Cat

egor

y

Japanese Trade in Services, 2004

Figure 2.216

Services: Maritime Transport

Japan's Transition Towards Becoming a Supplier of Sea Transport Services

-10.0-5.00.05.0

10.015.020.025.030.0

1999 2001 2003 2005

Year

Val

ue

in B

$

Exports Imports Net Exports

Figure 2.320,21,22,23

Services: Energy

Figure 2.424p1

Services: Misc.

Education MFN Exemptions

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 Products

Tariff reduction formulasThree possible types of formulasFormula 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

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

approachZero-for-zero approach

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

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

Table 1

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

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 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

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

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.

Fisheries Subsidies cont’d

Dispute Settlement Understanding

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

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

A target of anti-dumping investigations

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Number

Japan Korea, Rep.Of (South)

United States India EuropeanCommunity

Anti-Dumping Investigation Initiation By and Against Selected Economies, 01/95 to 06/06

By Against

Figure 2.525,26

Anti-dumping: Analysis

Antidumping investigation results

World Anti-Dumping Investigation Results, 01/95 to 06/06

1875

1063

Dumping confirmed No Dumping Found

Figure 2.625,27

Conclusion

References

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

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