The use of unmanned aerial vehicles and wireless sensor networks for spraying pesticides

The application of pesticides and fertilizers in agricultural areas is of crucial importance for crop yields. The use of aircrafts is becoming increasingly common in carrying out this task mainly because of their speed and effectiveness in the spraying operation. However, some factors may reduce the yield, or even cause damage (e.g., crop areas not covered in the spraying process, overlapping spraying of crop areas, applying pesticides on the outer edge of the crop). Weather conditions, such as the intensity and direction of the wind while spraying, add further complexity to the problem of maintaining control. In this paper, we describe an architecture to address the problem of self-adjustment of the UAV routes when spraying chemicals in a crop field. We propose and evaluate an algorithm to adjust the UAV route to changes in wind intensity and direction. The algorithm to adapt the path runs in the UAV and its input is the feedback obtained from the wireless sensor network (WSN) deployed in the crop field. Moreover, we evaluate the impact of the number of communication messages between the UAV and the WSN. The results show that the use of the feedback information from the sensors to make adjustments to the routes could significantly reduce the waste of pesticides and fertilizers.

Sustainable development in international law making and trade: International food governance and trade in agriculture

This timely book provides an accessible insight into how the concept of sustainable development can be made operational through its translation into legal terms. Understood as a multidimensional legal principle, sustainable development facilitates coherent international law making. Using this notion as an analytical lens on the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, the book considers the unresolved question of what a sustainable and coherent agricultural trade agreement could look like.

Towards a new balance of trade in agriculture

Trade in agriculture is linked to a whole range of economic, environmental, societal and future interests. For this reason, international regulation of trade in agricultural goods is highly contentious. While mainly directed towards an opening of markets, the WTO Agreement on Agriculture also has some entry points for ‘non trade concerns’. However, the agreement still looks like a casual patchwork that allows rather unsystematic ally for exemptions, without explicitly exposing the grounds that allow for them. The question arises of how the agreement could be drafted in a more structured way, in order to make sure that the economic objectives are efficiently pursued, and at the same time that human rights and environmental concerns are adequately taken account of? The concept of sustainable development provides for a methodical ‘seven step’ framework that gives guidance on integrated decision making processes. In this paper, this framework is partially applied to the Agreement on Agriculture. This working paper served as an introductory note to a brainstorming workshop on the subject that took place on 27 March 2009 at the World Trade Institute, University of Bern.

Three “Bali Deliverables” for more Food Security

As the clock is ticking for a positive outcome at the Ninth WTO Ministerial Conference to be held in Bali in December 2013, agricultural negotiators are scrambling to find solutions to issues such as tariff-rate quota (TRQ) administration and export competition in order to improve trade flows. The main issue seems to be whether WTO rules applying to public stockpiles in developing countries need to be changed or temporarily suspended as a means to enhance national food security. This paper is based on a note submitted to the ICTSD-IPC Expert Group “Meeting on Agriculture and Food Security – Policy Options for MC9 and beyond” (Geneva, June 2013). It lists the policy instruments impacting on global, national and (urban and rural) household food security – “The Food Security Tool Box” – and asks which immediate decisions the WTO Ministers might take in this field despite the political difficulties such as continued agro-dumping practices or the “land grab” issue. Three such “deliverables” are outlined: (i) regional and “virtual” food security schemes could be allowed to provide reserves to other countries without violating the obligation to “form an integral part of a food security programme identified in national legislation” (Agreement on Agriculture, Annex II, para 3); (ii) TRQ under-fills could be improved by mandatory enquiries into low fill rate situations; and (iii) World Food Program (WFP) and other non-commercial food purchases could be exempted from export restrictions and prohibitions. High ambitions for Bali seem to be misplaced. A more realistic yet real progress could restore the dwindling credibility of the WTO as a forum for trade negotiations.

The WTO and Food Security: What’s Wrong with the Rules?

The WTO Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) is the predominant multilateral legal framework governing agricultural trade. The objective of the AoA is to liberalise trade in agriculture through reductions in tariffs, domestic support and export subsidies. The AoA has not, however, ‘levelled the playing field’ and has not resulted in the equitable distribution of food, particularly for the poorer developing countries. On the other hand, support for small farmers does not ensure food security for the poor. While food security has no simple solutions such as “free trade is good for you”, reform proposals for trade rules which only address agricultural policy instruments fail to account for consumer and other interests: neither tariff reductions and subsidy disciplines, nor safeguards and other measures of producer protection can automatically increase food security. Rather, what is needed is the full and proper implementation of a number of commitments which the international community has already entered into in various human rights treaties, but which even the envisaged results of the now failed Doha Round negotiations could not ensure without revisiting relevant multilateral trade and investment rules.

Can the World Trade Organization Ensure that International Food Aid is Genuine?

The Doha Round negotiation mandate proposes to minimise trade distortions and commercial displacement under the cover of international food aid, without preventing genuine food aid from reaching people in need. This paper presents problematic aspects of food aid for trade and competition, an overview of the international governance of food aid, and the present rules on food aid embodied in Article 10.4 of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture. The latest available Draft Modalities for Agriculture (December 2008) are seen as an only halfway successful implementation of the Doha mandate. A new text with better targeted disciplines and a political food aid commitment as part of the Doha Round Final Act are proposed in the conclusions.

After Bali: WTO Rules Applying to Public Food Reserves

Once more, agriculture threatened to prevent all progress in multilateral trade rule-making at the Ninth WTO Ministerial Conference in December 2013. But this time, the “magic of Bali” worked. After the clock had been stopped mainly because of the food security file, the ministers adopted a comprehensive package of decisions and declarations mainly in respect of development issues. Five are about agriculture. Decision 38 on Public Stockholding for Food Security Purposes contains a “peace clause” which will now be shielding certain stockpile programmes from subsidy complaints in formal litigation. This article provides contextual background and analyses this decision from a legal perspective. It finds that, at best, Decision 38 provides a starting point for a WTO Work Programme for food security, for review at the Eleventh Ministerial Conference which will probably take place in 2017. At worst, it may unduly widen the limited window for government-financed competition existing under present rules in the WTO Agreement on Agriculture – yet without increasing global food security or even guaranteeing that no subsidy claims will be launched, or entertained, under the WTO dispute settlement mechanism. Hence, the Work Programme should find more coherence between farm support and socio-economic and trade objectives when it comes to stockpiles. This also encompasses a review of the present WTO rules applying to other forms of food reserves and to regional or “virtual” stockpiles. Another “low hanging fruit” would be a decision to exempt food aid purchases from export restrictions.

The Jurisprudence of the World Trade Organization 2014

In 2014, the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) of the World Trade Organization (WTO) adopted seven panel reports and six Appellate Body rulings. Two of the cases relate to anti-dumping measures. Three cases, comprising five complaints, are of particular interest and these are summarized and discussed below. China – Rare Earths further refines the relationship between protocols of accession and the general provisions of WTO agreements, in particular the exceptions of Article XX GATT. Recourse to that provision is no longer excluded but depends on a careful case-by-case analysis. While China failed to comply with the conditions for export restrictions, the case reiterates the problem of insufficiently developed disciplines on export restrictions on strategic minerals and other commodities in WTO law. EC – Seals Products is a landmark case for two reasons. Firstly, it limits the application of the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement) resulting henceforth in a narrow reading of technical regulations. Normative rules prescribing conditions for importation are to be dealt with under the rules of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) instead. Secondly, the ruling permits recourse to public morals in justifying import restrictions essentially on the basis of process and production methods (PPMs). Meanwhile, the more detailed implications for extraterritorial application of such rules and for the concept of PPMs remain open as these key issues were not raised by the parties to the case. Peru – Agricultural Products adds to the interpretation of the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA), but most importantly, it confirms the existing segregation of WTO law and the law of free trade agreements. The case is of particular importance for Switzerland in its relations with the European Union (EU). The case raises, but does not fully answer, the question whether in a bilateral agreement, Switzerland or the EU can, as a matter of WTO law, lawfully waive their right of lodging complaints against each other under WTO law within the scope of their bilateral agreement, for example the Agreement on Agriculture where such a clause exists.