< Previous | Contents | Next >
The Non-Agricultural Products Market Access (NAMA) is a part of the WTO provisions which deals with the idea of encouraging market reach to the non- agricultural goods of the member countries.78 But the encouragement was objected/opposed by the developing countries, especially pointing to the non- tariff barriers enforced by the developed countries. At the Doha Ministerial Conference (November 2001), ministers agreed to start negotiations to further liberalise trade of non-agricultural products. By early 2002, a Negotiating Group on NAMA was created. The members at the meet decided to go for tariff reductions on non-agricultural products adopting the Swiss Formula.
One major concern that the members took note was of the small and vulnerable economies for whom a flexibility was committed while going for tariff reductions. For India, market access is not an issue of tariffs alone, but it means elimination of tariff peaks and tariff escalation in the markets of the developed countries. It will also end the abuse of anti-dumping laws and remove non-tariff barriers (NTBs) used to block goods from developing countries.
A variety of alternative methods are possible in the process of tariff reductions—some are more common than others. Some are based on formulas. But one thing should be kept in mind that whatever formula be agreed upon it does not have value unless it is properly implemented. Even after a formula or combination of formulas has been agreed upon, the final
outcome of tariff reductions may depend on the bargaining capacity between countries.
The Swiss Formula 79 belongs to the classification of formulas known as having harmonising impact. Since such a formula prescribes a higher/steeper cut on higher tariffs and lower cuts on lower tariffs it is seen to harmonise the rates by bringing the final rates becoming closer and bridging the gap.
The formula was proposed by Switzerland in the Tokyo round negotiations of GATT (1973–79). But Switzerland opposes using this method in the current agriculture negotiations—it prefers the Uruguay Round formula.
The Uruguay Round (1986–94) negotiations in agriculture produced an agreement for developed countries to cut tariffs on agricultural products by an average of 36 per cent over six years (6 per cent per year) with a minimum tariff cut of 15 per cent on each product for the period. It was a version of flat rate method of tariff reductions.80