Agri-Environment and Rural Development in the Doha Round

The report examines how developing countries can utilize WTO-consistent support measures for rural development and the environment, focusing on the 'Green Box' of the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA). It analyzes the practices of 'Quad' countries (EU, USA, Canada, Japan) and evaluates three potential negotiation scenarios for the Doha Round, ranging from strict liberalization to expanded flexibilities for development needs. The author recommends that developing countries push for a new 'Development Box' or expanded Green Box access to protect food security and rural livelihoods while transitioning toward decoupled support.

• The 'Green Box' (Annex 2 of the Agreement on Agriculture) is the primary WTO instrument allowing unlimited spending on domestic support measures that are 'at most minimally trade-distorting,' including compensation for producers in disadvantaged regions or those implementing environmental programs.
• The European Union's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) includes a dedicated 'pillar' for rural development and agri-environment, featuring 'accompanying measures' such as early retirement, afforestation, and the Leader+ initiative for local integrated rural development.
• Other Quad countries employ various Green Box measures: Canada uses the Canadian Adaptation and Rural Development (CARD) program; the U.S. focuses on converting erodible cropland and protecting wetlands; and Japan supports irrigation, drainage, and sustainable practices to reduce fertilizer and pesticide use.
• Doha Round negotiations are split between three groups: a 'cautious' group (EU and Northern countries) advocating for 'non-trade concerns' (NTCs); an 'ambitious' group (U.S. and Cairns Group) seeking significant market access and limits on Green Box spending; and a 'special consideration' group (African Group and Like-Minded Group) demanding flexibility for food security and rural development.
• The Like-Minded Group (LMG) proposes a new 'Development Box' in the AoA to protect low-income and resource-poor farmers and secure 'food security crops' (FSCs), which would exempt these crops from reduction commitments and allow higher tariffs.
• The author identifies three likely negotiation outcomes: (1) a deal between 'ambitious' and 'special consideration' camps with narrowed general support but tailored developing-country flexibilities; (2) a deal between 'cautious' and 'special consideration' groups with generous flexibilities for all; or (3) a compromise that cuts Amber Box support and export subsidies while leaving the Green Box largely un-capped but clarified.

APA

Werth, A. (2003). Agri-Environment and Rural Development in the Doha Round. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/tkn_ruraldev_doha_sum.pdf

Chicago

Werth, Alexander. Agri-Environment and Rural Development in the Doha Round. International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2003. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/tkn_ruraldev_doha_sum.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Werth |first1=Alexander |title=Agri-Environment and Rural Development in the Doha Round |publisher=International Institute for Sustainable Development |date=June 2003 |url=https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/tkn_ruraldev_doha_sum.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{werth2003agrienvironment, author = {Werth, Alexander}, title = {{Agri-Environment and Rural Development in the Doha Round}}, institution = {International Institute for Sustainable Development}, year = {2003}, month = jun, url = {https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/tkn_ruraldev_doha_sum.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }