G-33 differs from India's stance on export restrictions on food items

The G-33 group of developing and least-developed countries, in which India is a key member, has taken a divergent stance on export restrictions on food items.

In a joint statement, accessed by Business Standard, G-33 said: “We reaffirm the urgency and importance of maintaining an open and predictable agricultural trade to ensure the continued flow of food, agricultural products, as well as inputs critical for agricultural and food production and supply chains.”

“We also underline the importance of enhancing production and maintaining food price stabilisation with least-distorting global markets,” the statement said.

The grouping met on the sidelines of the 12th Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organization (WTO) on Sunday.

The joint statement is also silent on India’s proposal to allow exports from public stockholding. This may have a significant impact on the outcome of the WTO ministerial conference. 

Facing criticism for its sudden ban on export of wheat last month, India has been advocating its right to first ensure food security for its citizens. Many developed countries want advance notification by any member country seeking to put export restrictions on food items.

“Under the provisions of the relevant WTO rules, WTO members can temporarily impose export prohibitions or restrictions to prevent or relieve critical shortages of foodstuffs or other products essential to the country. India has concerns with making notification requirements burdensome for developing countries. Members in view of the sensitivities regarding shortages, price escalations, and the implications of providing advance notice of such measures on the effectiveness of policies,” India’s commerce ministry had said in a statement on Saturday.

Established prior to the Cancun Ministerial in 2003, the G-33 grouping with 44 members now works as a pressure group within WTO on agriculture-related issues. Apart from India, the grouping has members, including Pakistan, China, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, and many African and Latin American countries.

A government official requesting anonymity said G-33 is a heterogeneous group and India has to make compromises to keep the group together. “Since India has the largest stockholding programme, other members of the grouping are concerned about India’s proposal for allowing exports from its public stockholding,” he added.

In fact, India was not part of the proposal moved by the G-33 on public stockholding for food security purposes at the WTO on July 28, 2021, which opposed exports from public stockholding. “A developing member shall endeavour not to export from the procured stocks covered under paragraph 1 (public stockholding) of this Annex unless requested by an importing member,” the statement had said.

However, India joined the other G-33 member countries in its proposal submitted to the WTO on June 6, along with the African Group, the ACP (African, Caribbean and Pacific) group after the text was revised.

In sync with India’s stance, the G-33, however, on Sunday reaffirmed its commitment for expeditious resolution of a permanent solution on public stockholding for food security purposes as one of the critical food security instruments and the special safeguard mechanism as an important instrument that would buffer developing countries and least-developed countries (LDCs) against sudden price declines or against major import surges.

“We recognise that it is the collective responsibility of all WTO members to address the challenges facing the multilateral trading system. Hence, all future work programmes must satisfactorily address the development issues of developing countries and LDCs with special and differential treatment as an integral part of international trade negotiations,” the G-33 said in the joint statement.