Abstract
Certain rulings relating to the Agreement on Agriculture have limited the development space available to developing countries, including India. At least two out of three ‘pillars’ of the Agreement which comprise of disciplines related to tariffication, agricultural market support and agricultural exports have been interpreted in a manner which would prohibit traditionally used measures such as quantitative restrictions at the border and minimum support price to farmers. This article will focus on disciplines on quantitative restrictions and the interpretation of the Panel and AB in Indonesia – Import Licensing Regimes which confirmed the ordinary meaning of Article 4.2. Further, it will analyse the rulings in Korea-Beef and China-Agricultural Producers which dramatically limit the agricultural support that can be provided by WTO members. Innovative arguments for development-friendly outcomes will be explored. However, as this article will demonstrate, such arguments will do little to address the systemic disadvantages that plague agricultural disciplines in developing countries today.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
