|
Online edition of India's National Newspaper Thursday, January 11, 2001 |
|
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Science & Tech |
Entertainment |
Miscellaneous |
Features |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home |
|
Opinion
| Next
Indian agriculture and WTO
THE BLAME FOR overflowing godowns and falling agricultural
product prices is being placed at the door of import
liberalisation in general and the World Trade Organisation in
particular. The impending removal of the last of the quantitative
restrictions (QRs) on all agricultural products has added to the
fears for the future of Indian agriculture. While contractual
obligations and import liberalisation forced on the Government
have indeed considerably increased the exposure to the world
market, there has been a tendency to shift the blame for domestic
problems on to external factors. There are four different sets of
WTO-related issues confronting Indian agriculture and public
debate frequently confounds them by seeing them as one when in
fact they are largely distinct.
The immediate challenge is what will follow the removal of QRs in
April. There is no reason to believe that there will be a flood
of imports, only that protection can no longer be provided by a
ban on imports but by customs duties. With the plugging of
loopholes that existed in the form of zero tariffs on cereals and
dairy products, agriculture will for now continue to enjoy a
measure of protection. Where the Government could fail - as it
did in the case of edible oil imports - is by moving slowly on
increasing tariffs whenever global or domestic prices fall.
However, the fairly high levels of tariff protection that India
can now invoke could be under threat when the next phase of
multilateral negotiations on agriculture begins at the WTO. This
is the second issue, on which the Government has approved a set
of proposals which will constitute India's initial negotiating
stance. These talks will be completed only years down the line.
In its first proposals, the Government appears to have chosen to
place greater importance on protecting agriculture than on
liberalising farm exports. This is apparent from the demand for
constituting a ``Food Security Box'' that will facilitate higher
levels of protection and codify provisions that already exist in
WTO agreements. An influential section in the policy-making
establishment has been pushing for India to become an aggressive
agricultural exporter. But the twin of joining the side of the
agricultural exporters at the WTO is a lowering of import
protection. While India continues to demand adequate market
access for its exports, the Government has wisely decided against
too aggressive a position on liberalisation of trade in
agriculture. The third issue is the functioning of the 1994 WTO
deal on agriculture, which far from boosting trade has been used
by the rich countries to increase farm subsidies. Experts in the
country have demanded a review of this agreement, but such a
review underlies the preparatory work now going on at the WTO for
future talks. Besides, India has officially already made
proposals to address the ``implementation problems'' in the farm
pact. Going further may force India to offer more concessions on
imports. A fourth issue is intellectual property protection.
Compelled as India was in 1994 to agree to provide sui generis
protection to plant varieties it had the choice of drafting its
own legislation. This could have contained innovative provisions
to protect traditional rights. Yet, six years of procrastination
and inter-Ministry squabbling have meant that no legislation has
been enacted, opening the door to disputes at the WTO from other
countries.
When imports have caused problems they have followed either
leaden-footed decision-making or the Government placing the
interests of the consumers above that of the farmers. Both were
evident in the setting of tariffs for edible oils (mainly
palmolein) which were raised only recently. The larger problems
that Indian farmers face are the result of high costs, low
productivity, falling public investment, poor market development
and ultimately limited purchasing power among one billion people.
All these are the making of domestic policies.
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail
|
|
Section : Opinion Next : More shocks in the script | |
|
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Science & Tech |
Entertainment |
Miscellaneous |
Features |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home | |
|
Copyrights © 2001 The Hindu Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu |
|