The WTO General Council meeting concluded on July 29 without issuing the Approximations of a possible draft text for the next Ministerial. It is to be held in Hong Kong in December, before the organisation goes on annual vacation. This indicates all is not well with the ongoing Doha Round of trade negotiations, launched in 2001. This Round has shown lacklustre progress, with most of the key deadlines missed and a failed Cancun Ministerial.

The Doha Round was launched to address some of the development concerns raised by the Uruguay Round (UR). UR had left developing countries considerably disenchanted. They were forced to undertake major commitments of trade liberalisation and tariff bindings, besides substantial obligations involving their intellectual property rights, investments, and trade in services. The lure: promise of additional market access by developed countries through liberalisation of agricultural trade, textiles and clothing and movement of natural persons.

The gains from the UR proposals in these areas were estimated at $213 to $510 billion annual growth in world income, with developing countries benefiting to the tune of $86 to $122 billion. However, it has been empirically shown that much deeper commitments were undertaken by developing countries in the UR and the mercantilist balance resulting from trade liberalisation has been in favour of developed countries. The promised market access to developing countries has failed to materialise. Peak tariffs continue to impede exports of labour-intensive goods. UR agreements, such as Trips and Trims, are resulting in significant income transfers from developing countries, besides reducing the policy space for development. Hardly any liberalisation has taken place in movement of natural persons under Mode 4 of Gats. S&DT provisions have been considerably diluted.

Therefore, there was considerable resistance among developing countries to launch yet another trade Round. The Doha Declaration, launching the so called ?Develop-ment Round,? called for positive efforts to ensure developing countries benefit from enhanced market access and balanced rules. The highlights included a commitment in the area of agriculture to substantially improve market access, progress towards phasing out all forms of export subsidies and substantial reduction of trade-distorting domestic support. It also accepted the primacy of public health concerns and offered to provide flexibility to poorer countries from the Trips agreement?s provisions to import cheaper generic medicines.

In the area of market access for industrial products, commitments were made to eliminate or reduce peak tariffs, high tariffs, tariff escalation and NTBs, particularly on products of export interest to developing countries. The modalities for tariff reduction were supposed to be on less-than-full-reciprocity basis, implying developing countries would be required to reduce less than developed countries. Commitments were also made to review the S&DT provisions for developing countries to make these more precise, effective and operational.

However, the progress since the Doha Ministerial has been far from satisfactory. Almost all deadlines, important from the point of view of developing countries, were missed. On the other hand, developing countries were being pushed to agree to give the negotiating mandate on the ?Singapore Issues? at the Cancun Ministerial, despite the lack of explicit consensus. Hence, the Fifth WTO Ministerial Conference held in Cancun in September 2003 collapsed.

• The Uruguay Round tilted the balance clearly in favour of developed countries
• The Doha Declaration called for positive efforts for developing countries? benefit
• With progress poor, we need extra effort for the Hong Kong ministerial?s success

Subsequently, the process was revived with the July Package of 2004, that dropped three of the four Singapore Issues from the Doha Agenda and made renewed commitment to eliminate export subsidies. However, over the past year, progress has been very poor. In the key areas of agriculture, developed countries continue to adopt a rather evasive attitude towards eliminating export subsidies and reducing domestic support, while having a very high level of ambition with respect to market access. Keeping in mind the livelihood security of millions of poor farmers and their inability to subsidise these, developing countries would obviously like to move cautiously on the market access agenda in agriculture.

In non-agricultural market access (Nama), the modalities suggested by the developed countries are based on the Swiss formula, which means developing countries with higher average tariffs would reduce these much more steeply. Hence, it goes against the spirit of less-than-full-reciprocity enshrined in the Doha Agenda. Virtually no progress has been made on S&DT to make them ?precise, effective and operational.?

Considering this, prospects do not appear very bright for the Hong Kong Ministerial. The outgoing director-general, Dr Supachai, and the chairperson of the General Council have expressed their disappointment on the progress so far. Although there is still time for bringing about coherence and building consensus till December, it will be very challenging. Developed countries need to show leadership and restore the spirit of Doha and make the Round a truly ?Development Round.? That would require going the extra mile. The concept of non-reciprocity is very much enshrined in the Gatt. The only thing missing is leadership and vision on the part of the leading trading nations. Let us hope that Hong Kong will not go the Cancun way!

The writer is director-general, Research and Information System for Developing Countries (RIS). These are his personal views