Green Box Support Measures Under the WTO Agreement on Agriculture and Chinese Agricultural Sustainable Development

This executive summary by the Chinese Academy of International Trade and Economic Cooperation (CAITEC) examines the role of WTO 'Green Box' support measures in China's agricultural transition following its 2001 accession to the WTO. It analyzes how China can utilize non-trade-distorting support to achieve sustainable development and structural adjustment while arguing that current WTO rules are biased toward developed nations.

• China's accession to the WTO requires a significant overhaul of agricultural policies to comply with Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA) rules. Specific commitments include removing state-set prices for major products, reducing tariffs, lifting export subsidies, and limiting domestic agricultural support to 8.5 per cent.
• WTO accession is expected to trigger long-term structural changes in Chinese agriculture, including a shrinking share of agriculture in the national GDP, a decline in grain production acreage, and a shift toward labour-intensive crops for export. It may also weaken regional self-sufficiency patterns, making southern regions more dependent on imports than on northern grains.
• Between 1996 and 1998, Green Box expenditure averaged 14.2 per cent of total government budgetary expenditures. Approximately 60 per cent of these measures focused on infrastructure construction and domestic food reserves to ensure food security.
• China has not adopted several Green Box measures related to producer income—such as direct payments, decoupled income support, and income insurance—due to financial and administrative constraints and the fact that 50 per cent of the total labour force consists of farmers in one of the world's poorest countries.
• The effectiveness of China's Green Box measures is undermined by systemic issues, including the diversion of research funds for staff remuneration, a tendency to subsidize distribution over production, and the imposition of high agricultural taxes (RMB 40 billion from agricultural tax alone) that result in an overall negative value for agricultural support.
• The document argues that Green Box measures are not truly neutral and can still distort trade by affecting farmers' wealth, investment capacity, and risk expectations. It claims the current WTO framework is biased toward developed countries, as developing nations often lack the administrative infrastructure (such as income registration systems) to implement decoupled support.

APA

Yumin, Z., Hongxia, W., & Mayu, L. (2003). Green Box Support Measures Under the WTO Agreement on Agriculture and Chinese Agricultural Sustainable Development. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/tkn_greenbox_china_sum.pdf

Chicago

Yumin, Zhao, Wang Hongxia, and Linxuegui Mayu. Green Box Support Measures Under the WTO Agreement on Agriculture and Chinese Agricultural Sustainable Development. International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2003. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/tkn_greenbox_china_sum.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Yumin |first1=Zhao |last2=Hongxia |first2=Wang |last3=Mayu |first3=Linxuegui |title=Green Box Support Measures Under the WTO Agreement on Agriculture and Chinese Agricultural Sustainable Development |publisher=International Institute for Sustainable Development |date=June 2003 |url=https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/tkn_greenbox_china_sum.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{yumin2003green, author = {Yumin, Zhao and Hongxia, Wang and Mayu, Linxuegui}, title = {{Green Box Support Measures Under the WTO Agreement on Agriculture and Chinese Agricultural Sustainable Development}}, institution = {International Institute for Sustainable Development}, year = {2003}, month = jun, url = {https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/tkn_greenbox_china_sum.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }