Running head: W.T.

O AGREEMENTS 1

W.T.O Agreements

Name

Institution
W.T.O AGREEMENTS 2

Agreement on Agriculture (AoA)

Having established a focal point in starting a program to reform on trade in the

agricultural sector.The main agenda of the discussion as per the Punter del Este Declaration was

that the future objectives as concluded within the Mid-Term Review of the Uruguay Round “was

to come up with a cost-efficient, market-oriented trade in agricultural system that changes in

processes and should begin with the negotiation of adherence to the objectives, support and

protect with the establishment of the strengthened and more practical and efficient GATT norms

and regulations.

Commitments to hit the specified goals in each of these given areas in agriculturally

trade-market accessibility, export competition, domestic support and agreement on sanitary and

physio-sanitary issues, the country partisans would, therefore, take full control of the needs and

conditions of developing the country. Reforms programs must thus be made in an equitable way

among all participants. However, some sections look problematic regarding the agreement as

follows.

From article 6 of the agreement; domestic support commitment, the first problem

encountered here in accord with criteria that come out from this article. Is that the internal

support reduction commitments of individuals within section four must be practiced by all of its

local support measures in favoritism in agriculture? A problem based on local standards that

aren’t subject to reduction inline this case, the commitments are indicative regarding totality in

the measurement of support and annual and financial bound commitments.

Additionally, with the Mid-Term Agreements that govern the measure of assistance from

the relevant authorities, direct or indirect, it enhances agricultural developments at the provincial
W.T.O AGREEMENTS 3

level are integral parts of the development programs of the developing countries. Most of the

individuals the members who benefit from these services are resource-poor producers. Should

they be exempted from the domestics support reduction commitment, economic crisis? The

support would have been brought to a standstill. The local support meetings shall be involved

within the structure of the Current Total AMS.

Members who qualify will be considered in the event to comply with its local support

change in any period of the year that is a local support to enhance agricultural produces as

indicated in the Current Total AMS will prove problematic as it would not go further than

corresponding to final bound as stated from section four of the member's schedule.

Agreement on Trade-Related Aspect Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS)

The Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the WTO includes the Multilateral Trade

Agreements as applicable to all WTE members. The Trips agreement which came into existence

in January 1995, is binding each of its members of the WTO from the time the WTO Agreement

becomes sufficient for it. However, the TRIPS Agreement gave original Members transitional

periods that depended on their level of development, to bring themselves into compliance with

rules. In the process, the agreement has proved problematic as follows;

The consensus on tariff deductions agreed upon by the members who shall become active

on the entry into an enactment of the WTO Agreement. If unless otherwise stated, its program,

members shall, on the date that Agreement enters into action for it, make effective all reductions

that have need mandatory to make effective on 1 January of the year following. This should
W.T.O AGREEMENTS 4

make effective all remaining rates reductions on the scheduled in the last sentence to avoid this,

the reduced this, in each stage be rounded off to the first decimal.

Third world countries mainly have seen the adoption of the new technology as a bargain

whereby they have settled to safeguard intellectual property rights. The TRIPS Agreement

engages provisions this situation. For instance, one of the targets of safeguarding the intellectual

items is to support development in innovation and the advanced technology exchange programs,

and therefore third world countries’ government must provide incentives to their manufactures

and technical institutions to transfer the technology to the emerging nations. To be more precise,

from article seven’s objectives, it explains that the protection properties rights must be positive

to the development of technological innovations and the exchange and transfer of technology for

the co-existence advantage of manufacturers and consumers.

In article twenty-eight, the modification of concessions that are associated with tariff-free

measures as observed in part three of the schedules, the avails of GATT 1994 and the

instructions of the agreement under the same article. This shall, therefore, apply without any

favor to the rights and duties of members under GATT 1994.When it comes to enforcement,

some third world countries focused on counterfeiting and piracy as they claim that it is a serious

problem and therefore wanted to discuss it.

Third world countries disagreed, claiming they are being targeted and would be used to

argue for new conditions tighter than those in TRIPS. Recently, the discussion has focused on

Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement agreed by some countries opposition to participate work

on enacting in the WTO was a reason why they settled the agreement outside the WTO.
W.T.O AGREEMENTS 5

From the above, as seen from the Agreement of Agriculture as well as Agreements on

Trade-Related Aspect on Intellectual Property Rights, it can be concluded that they were both

problematic as illustrated above.

References

FAO. 1998. The Implications of the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture for Developing

Countries: A Training Manual, by S. Healy, R. Pearce & M.

Stockbridge. Training Materials for Agricultural Planning No. 41. Rome.

 http://www.worldtradelaw.net/reports/wtopanelsfull/indonesia-autos(panel)(full).pd

https://iprsonline.org/unctadictsd/docs/GDutfield_LiteratureSurveyOnIP_April2003

Jean-Frederic, M, 'Tripping up TRIPs Debate: IP and Health,' International Journal of

Intellectual Property Management 1(1/2), 2006:37-53.

Josling, T, Tangerman, S. & Warley, T.K. 1996. Agriculture in the GATT. London, Macmillan Press Ltd.

Valdes, A. & Zietz, J. (1980). Agricultural protection in OECD countries: its costs to less developed

countries, IFPRI Research Report Number 21. Washington, DC, IFPRI.