正文 字体大小:

致世贸组织总裁电邮-1 Email to WTO Director-General

(2010-07-13 03:15:12)



Jian-Ming Zhou Email to WTO Director-General Lamy of 23 Sep. 2009


Subject: Developed countries will not lose agriculture

Date: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 7:50 PM

From: "Jian-Ming Zhou" <jmzhou46@yahoo.com>

To: Pascal Lamy 

Dear WTO Director-General Dr Pascal Lamy,

I appreciate your persuading the developed countries to make more concessions in agriculture. For example. (http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/sppl_e/sppl116_e.htm)

'25 February 2009 Lamy underscores Doha Round benefits for Japan'

'Of course, Japan will face pressure from other WTO members to further open its agricultural market and to accept new disciplines for fishery subsidies. I understand this is a difficult decision at home and that it will take some time. But I just want to assure you that this happens everywhere. It is not easier for the US or European Union to reduce its agricultural subsidies or for the Chinese government to reduce its industrial tariffs further. Multilateral trade negotiations are a GIVE and TAKE, no country can ever get everything it wants, and no country will LOSE EVERYTHING without returns. Eventually, a delicate balance of rights and obligations will be reached.' 

However, this might cause a concern that they would lose agriculture while gaining more access in the developing countries for industry and services. Because agriculture (especially cereals production) is a strategic lifeline, they would not be willing to lose it and rely on imports. This would lead them to refuse to make more concessions in the Doha negotiations.

But my Proposal would make them NOT lose agriculture. 

In most countries (EU, Japan, South Korea, Switzerland, etc.), once the protectionist subsidies have been abolished, many (particularly small) farmers might not produce sufficiently on their land, nor lease it to the remaining full-time farmers. Under such circumstances, the government should give full-time farmers access to the under-producing land beyond family consumption need of part-time and absent farmers, by creating a Dual Land System. A landowner may keep a part of his land as land for family consumption even if he does not produce sufficiently on it. The rest of the land is land for market. If nobody would like to lease it in, the landowner may keep it even without sufficient production, so that overproduction could be prevented. But if other farmers, without being forced by any one, merely out of their own economic considerations, would like to lease it in so as to achieve economies of scale, reduce costs and become viable or more competitive, the owner could not refuse even at low rents, so that the irrational production abandonment could also be avoided.

In the USA and Canada, the earlier immigrants had formed the largest farms of the world with very low costs which could easily feed their small population. Thus once the protectionist subsidies have been lifted, even if many small farmers do not produce sufficiently on their land nor lease it to the remaining full-time farmers, the nation’s food basic self-sufficiency would not be lost, just as in New Zealand and Australia. Only after their population has grown to the extent of threatening food basic self-sufficiency (especially in cereals), demanding more food and crops for biofuel, the above-mentioned Proposal would need to be applied. 

This Proposal is a modification of the current and former US and Western European laws, overcoming their shortcomings. For details, please gently examine my fifth FAO publication (http://www.icarrd.org/en/proposals/Zhou.pdf), pp. 1-7 only.

Therefore, the developed countries do NOT need to worry about losing agriculture after abolishing protectionist subsidies, NOR need to ask the developing countries to open more industry and services to the extent that they cannot afford as an exchange. Because my voice is too weak, would it be possible for you to graciously convey my opinions to the Doha negotiators publicly? If so, I should be most grateful. 

Of course, if you have any comments, please let me know.

Looking forward to hearing from you. With many thanks and best wishes. 

Sincerely yours,

Jian-Ming Zhou

PhD and Researcher

Florence, Italy

题目: 发达国家不会丧失农业

日期: 2009923日星期三下午07:50

发自: 周兼名"Jian-Ming Zhou" <jmzhou46@yahoo.com>

发给: 巴斯卡尔拉米  









这项建议对当前和以前美国和西欧有关法律做了修正,克服了它们的缺点详细内容请审阅我在联合国粮农组织所发表的第五篇文章(http://www.icarrd.org/en/proposals/Zhou.pdf) (仅占第1-7)。中译本见















阅读 评论 收藏 转载 喜欢 打印举报
  • 评论加载中,请稍候...





    新浪BLOG意见反馈留言板 不良信息反馈 电话:4006900000 提示音后按1键(按当地市话标准计费) 欢迎批评指正

    新浪简介 | About Sina | 广告服务 | 联系我们 | 招聘信息 | 网站律师 | SINA English | 会员注册 | 产品答疑

    新浪公司 版权所有