The CAP is also affected by land concessions granted to several multilateral and bilateral agreements under several multilateral and bilateral agreements, as well as unilateral exemptions granted under the Generalized Preference System (GSP). These preferential agreements explain the high level of EU agricultural imports from developing countries (3.2.10, Table VI). These agreements provide some flexibility in implementation by developing countries as well as for WTO members (special and differentiated treatment) and least developed countries (LDCs) and net food-importing developing countries (special provisions). The agricultural negotiations under the Uruguay Round were not easy, as the broad scope of the negotiations and their political sensitivity inevitably took a long time to reach agreement on the new rules and it took a great deal of technical work to create solid means to formalize commitments in policy areas beyond the scope of previous GATT practice. The agreement on agriculture and the agreement on the application of health and plant health measures were negotiated in parallel and a decision on the possible negative impacts of the reform programme on the least developed developing countries and net food-importing developing countries was also part of the overall outcome. Domestic support regimes for agriculture are governed by the agriculture agreement, which came into force in 1995 and was negotiated during the Uruguay Round (1986-1994). The long-term goal of the AoA is to establish a fair and market-oriented agricultural trading system and to initiate a reform process through negotiations on promised commitments and safeguards and by defining more effective and operationally effective rules and disciplines. Agriculture is therefore special, because the sector has its own agreement, the provisions of which are given priority. Before the Uruguay Round negotiations, it became increasingly clear that the causes of confusion in global agriculture went beyond the import access problems, which had been the traditional centre of gravity of the GATT negotiations. To reach the root causes of the problems, disciplines were considered essential for all agricultural trade measures, including national agricultural policy and agricultural export subsidies. In addition, clearer rules on health and plant health measures were deemed necessary, both in their own legislation and in avoiding the circumvention of stricter rules on access to imports through unjustified and protectionist application of food security, as well as animal and plant health measures. Although agriculture has always been under GATT, there have been some significant differences in the rules for primary agricultural products as opposed to industrial products before the WTO. The 1947 GATT allowed countries to use export subsidies for primary agricultural products, while export subsidies for industrial products were prohibited.
The only conditions were that agricultural export subsidies should not be used to cover more than a fair share of world merchandise exports (Article XVI:3 of GATT). The GATT rules also allowed countries to resort, under certain conditions, to import restrictions (for example. B import quota), particularly where these restrictions were necessary to impose effective measures to limit domestic production (Article XI, paragraph 2, sub c) of the GATT). This derogation was also conditional on the fact that a minimum share of imports relative to domestic production was maintained. The 1947 GATT initially applied to agriculture, but was incomplete, and the signatory states (or “contracting parties”) excluded this sector from the scope of the principles set out in the general agreement.