Ken Ash, Visiting Fellow at the Institute for International Trade, University of Adelaide and one of the authors of the report, discussed the main findings. He observed that input and output-linked subsidies are the most damaging form of agricultural support since they incentivize producers to overuse inputs such as fertilizers, pesticides, etc. and over-produce outputs which strain environmental resources and distort land use patterns. Unfortunately, schemes like these form the bulk of domestic government support for the agriculture sector. To address this pressing challenge, he said it was crucial to make research and information on the damages caused by these policies, widely available; address this issue in multilateral and plurilateral platforms; and focus on comprehensive subsidy reform across sectors. He also remarked that it was not enough that ‘experts talk to other experts’, and stakeholders at all levels should come together to co-develop solutions.

Deborah Elms, Executive Director of the Asian Trade Centre cited a lack of transparency and lack of visibility on how discourses on subsidies, trade distortionary practices, and environmentally damaging practices engage with each other as prime reasons for the dearth of policy action on this issue. Politically influential agribusiness lobbies make this challenge trickier and a lack of multilateral forums prevents a regional or global initiative to address this challenge.

The session, moderated by Chuin Wei Yap, Program Director, International Trade Research, Hinrich Foundation, concluded with a Q&A for the panel of experts. The discussion focused on the domestic challenges faced in subsidy reform, explored the alternative support structures governments can provide to the agriculture sector, and examined the relevance of the findings to the Asia-Pacific region.