DDA 농업협상 개도국 특별긴급관세(SSM) 쟁점분석

Abstract

2008년 7월 잠정합의 직전에 결렬된 DDA 협상은 현재까지 답보상태를 보이고 있다. 현재 DDA 협상의 중요한 핵심 사항은 거의 결정되었고 잔여 쟁점 중에서 개도국 특별긴급관세(Special Safeguard Mechanism: SSM)를 중심으로 이루어지고 있는데 특히 농산물 수출국을 중심으로 한 선진국과 개도국그룹(G33)이 대립하고 있다. SSM 관련 쟁점사안은 현재 기술적인 부분들이 논의되고 있는데 특히, 발동기준, pro-rating 적용, 계절성 문제, cross-check 의무도입 등이 구체적으로 부각되었다. 2009년 하반기부터는 SSM 관련 주요 쟁점에 대해 실제 수출입자료를 활용한 시뮬레이션 결과를 가지고 논의되기 시작하였다. 우리나라는 G33 국가와 공동으로 SSM 문제에 대처하고 있으며 주도적인 역할을 하고 있다. 이 연구는 주요국 수출입 통계에 기초한 SSM 관련 쟁점별 시뮬레이션으로 농산물 수출국이 제시한 논리의 타당성을 검증하고 쟁점별 득실을 분석하였다.

The purpose of this study is to analyze the recent discussions regarding the 4th revised modality draft for the Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM) on trade in the DDA. Empirical data was used to examine several outstanding issues in the SSM negotiations. The analysis results are as follows. First, since the SSM is not yet operational, the concerns for its frequent use can only be assessed by examining the similar instrument SSG (Special Safeguard). If the import volume during SSG-invoked months is compared with that of non-SSG months in Korea, Japan, and the U.S. under the Uruguay Round, the import volume during SSG-invoked months did not show any decisive evidence of a decline. In this context, the exporting countries' argument that the invocation of the SSM would inhibit trade growth is unfounded. It would be unreasonable to analyze the impact of the SSM on the assumption that import would be zero if the SSM is invoked. Secondly, pro-rating has been analyzed. The simulation result indicates that introduction of pro-rating in calculating the 3-year rolling average of import volume increases trigger levels by a significant amount, thus limiting the chance of invocating the SSM. If import volume is assumed to be zero under an invoked SSM, the effect of pro-rating would be significant. But if import volume is assumed to decline by 25% under the SSM, then the effect of pro-rating becomes smaller. Thirdly, the existence of seasonality for agricultural products was analyzed using monthly data of U.S., Brazil and Australia. The results show that seasonality might exist in production and export of some commodities in some countries, but it is very different country by country and product by product. From the importing countries' point of view, import volume might not change during a given year. Thus, seasonality is not a pattern that is prevalent in all products and thus should not be accepted in the modalities for the SSM. Fourth, the application of cross check would restrict the chance of the SSM being invoked and thus severely undermine the purpose of introducing the SSM in the DDA. There may be considerable time lags between import surges and its impact on domestic markets. Also establishing domestic prices for each tariff line will be very difficult, thus making the SSM unworkable for many developing countries if cross check becomes a mandatory condition. Lastly, regarding the duration and/or spill-over of remedies, it is found that the longer the period, the stronger the impact on import on average. However, it did not show a consistent sign. The reason might be explained by the trade-offs between duration/spill-over and x-month on/off.Researchers: Tae-Hoon Kim, JooHo Song, Dae-Hee ChungResearch period: Jan 2010 ~ March 2010E-mail address: taehun@krei.re.kr, jhsong@krei.re.kr, dhchung@krei.re.kr