11th WTO Ministerial - Letter from Global Civil Society about the Agenda of the WTO
Dear Members of the World Trade Organization (WTO),
We are writing as 309[i] member organizations of global civil society from more than 150 countries, representing tens of millions of people from around the world, regarding the ongoing negotiations on the WTO towards the 11th Ministerial meeting (MC11) in Buenos Aires, December 10-13, 2017.
We are increasingly concerned about press reports indicating that some WTO members are pushing a dangerous and inappropriate new agenda under the disguising rubric of “e-commerce,” even though there was no consensus to introduce this new issue during or since the Nairobi Ministerial. In addition, we are deeply disturbed by reports that the urgent need to change existing WTO rules which are constraining governments’ policy space for job creation and development, including achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), is becoming further blocked in the lead-up to the 11th Ministerial.
Citizens around the world have given clear messages to governments that the current rules of the global economy, including global trade rules, have exacerbated inequality and left far too many impoverished. Thus, we urge WTO members to reflect on this dynamic and to take decisions that will allow the global trading system to contribute to, rather than constrain, shared prosperity and development.
Below we outline our concerns regarding the following issues that are being, or should be, discussed in WTO:
· Proposals regarding e-commerce and their impact on national laws and regulations;
· Proposals to limit the scope and effects of public interest regulation;
· Fish subsidy disciplines that discourage overfishing by rich countries but still allow poor countries to grow;
· The time has come to fix bad existing WTO rules, not to expand them;
· Agricultural rules must prioritize food security and food sovereignty;
· There is a need for more flexibility for development policies.
Wrong Agenda: E-commerce
A number of new e-commerce proposals have been made at the WTO in the last year. Proponents often disguise their proposals under the rubric of e-commerce as being necessary to unleash development through the power of small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). But SMEs are the least likely to be able to compete with giant transnational corporations, which enjoy the benefits of scale, historic subsidies, technological advances, strong state-sponsored infrastructure, tax avoidance strategies, and a system of trade rules written for them and by their lawyers.
Key provisions of the proposals include prohibiting requirements to hold data locally; to have a local presence in the country; no border taxes on digital products; prohibitions on regulating cross-border data transfers; and even prohibitions on requiring open source software in government procurement contracts. There is no economic rationale as to why digitally traded goods should not have to contribute to the national tax base, while traditionally traded goods usually do. Data is now the most valuable resource; furthermore, privacy and data protection are fundamental human rights and they cannot be abandoned in the interests of trade. Locking in rules in the WTO to allow corporations to transfer data around the world without restrictions would forever deny the right of countries and citizens to benefit from their own data and intelligence in the future, and it would restrict the ability of countries to implement appropriate data privacy and consumer protection measures. What e-commerce proposal proponents call “localization barriers” are actually the tools that countries use to ensure that they can benefit from the presence of transnational corporations to advance their own development and the economic, social, and political rights of their citizens.
We need trade rules that allow for the creation of decent jobs, including in the technology sector. But the hallmarks of companies like Amazon, Facebook, Google, and Uber include dislocation of local businesses and labor markets, and increasing precariousness of work. These would accelerate if e-commerce proposals were accepted in the WTO. Existing technology giants would be able to further consolidate their monopoly power. Their infamous tax optimization (which is tantamount to evasion), including base erosion and profit shifting, would be facilitated by a binding international treaty, and it would be nearly impossible to rein in the political instability engendered by the economic and financial consequences of such a scenario.
WTO members do not currently have a mandate to negotiate new global rules on “e-commerce,” and they should not obtain one in Buenos Aires. All of the issues proposed for the e-commerce agenda have either already been discussed and resolved, or are currently being discussed, in other forums, most of which are more responsive and accountable to public interest concerns than the WTO. E-commerce is already flourishing and SMEs can already sell their products online without new WTO rules. Of course, e-commerce can be a force for job creation and development, and certainly has the power to expand innovation, increase consumer choice, and connect remote producers and consumers. But supporting e-commerce is not the same as having binding global rules that would primarily benefit U.S.-based high-tech corporations, at the expense of public interest regulation to protect consumers and promote development. While we support efforts by developing countries to address the digital divide, transfer technology, and obtain financing for infrastructure and information and communications technologies (ICTs), the WTO is not the proper forum to negotiate these issues; similar to the way other development issues have been treated in the WTO, they will not become binding obligations, while the agenda of the high-tech corporations will be binding. There should absolutely be no new mandate on e-commerce in MC11.
Threats to Public Interest Regulation
The SDGs recently agreed by all WTO members include a focus on expanding access to and quality of many public services, as well as key services often operated by the private sector such as financial services and telecommunications. Unfortunately, much like the e-commerce agenda, a similar corporate agenda is behind the effort to have new rules limiting domestic regulation of services. The proposed rules on Domestic Regulation in the services negotiations in the WTO seek to ensure that three kinds of regulation - qualification requirements and procedures, licensing requirements and procedures, and technical standards - meet vague and open-ended standards that would severely undermine the regulatory sovereignty of countries.
These are open-ended terms designed to minimize regulation and maximize the lobbying power of transnational corporations over sovereign governments. Giving the WTO jurisdiction to adjudicate whether a regulation was “reasonable,” “objective,” “transparent,” and “not more burdensome than necessary to ensure the quality of the service,” and further that a technical standard was developed in an “open and transparent process” would put the interests of foreign services providers above governments’ obligation to ensure that services are operated in the public interest. It is not the WTO that should decide whether the administration of labor, tax, environmental or safety laws affecting foreign services firms is “reasonable.” The WTO should not be given authority to decide if the local zoning commission’s agreement with local objections to place a big box store near a historic site is “objective.” If a state decides to accept an environmental review’s recommendation to ban fracking as a method of mining gas, a WTO panel should not have the jurisdiction to decide if that is “too burdensome.” Local governments – not trade panels - should have the ultimate authority to decide community issues that are inherently subjective because they involve important judgment calls. And foreign companies should not have “rights” to comment or input on measures proposed by local or national authorities before they are decided domestically.
Members did agree years ago to develop any necessary disciplines on these measures – but there has never been an agreement whether such rules are “necessary,” which they obviously are not. Thus, no disciplines should be agreed on domestic regulation in Buenos Aires.
Fishing: Subsidizing the Poor or the Rich?
The other big ‘deliverable’ being pushed for Buenos Aires is a way to tackle the problem of overfishing by negotiating limits to the subsidies that governments provide to fisheries. There is a clear mandate for a pro-development and pro-environment outcome; but this cannot be lost due to the insistence of existing industrial fishing nations on rules that undermine the future developmental aspirations of developing countries. Despite the use of subsidies to build their industrial fishing capacity, those very same nations are attempting to prevent other developing countries from also building their domestic capacity, undermining development and doing little to prevent illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing as well as over-fishing. For many developing countries, fisheries are at the heart of their economic and developmental aspirations. Protecting the policy space of developing countries and the ability to support small-scale and artisanal fishers must be at the heart of any outcome, along with effective, binding prohibitions on subsidies. The developmental and economic policy space of developing countries must be maintained whilst those nations that have contributed most to the problem of IUU and overfishing must agree to eliminate harmful subsidies. The management of fisheries resources must be maintained outside of the WTO.
What Should Be on the Agenda: Fixing Bad Existing Rules Not Expanding Them
Both e-commerce rules and domestic regulation disciplines would amount to an expansion of the WTO. But the vast majority of WTO members have argued that existing unfair and damaging rules must be fixed before the WTO can be expanded. This fight was at the heart of the last Ministerial in Nairobi, which concluded with ambiguous language acknowledging that some countries wanted to bring in other issues, while others (the overwhelming majority) want to continue with the unfinished development agenda that had been the reason they had agreed to the Doha Round.
Unfortunately, some WTO members are obstinately refusing to move forward on what should be the core agenda: to fix the unjust rules that hinder global efforts to ensure true food security, sustainable development, access to affordable healthcare and medicines, and global financial stability, outlined in the Turnaround Statement of the global Our World Is Not for Sale (OWINFS) network, endorsed by hundreds of civil society groups from around the world. At a minimum, in Buenos Aires, WTO members should focus on transforming the global agriculture rules that restrict developing countries from ensuring food security for their populations (while allowing big agribusiness nearly limitless public subsidies) and increasing flexibilities for developing countries to be able use trade for their own development.
Agricultural Rules Must Prioritize Food Security and Food Sovereignty
The top priority for a genuine development agenda would be transforming the current rules on agriculture. Unbelievably, it is the rich countries, not the poor, which are currently allowed to subsidize agriculture under WTO rules – even in ways that distort trade and harm other countries’ domestic producers. The tens of billions of dollars of subsidies allowed in developed countries per annum encourage overproduction and artificially depress world prices, wiping out farmers’ livelihoods in countries that should be benefitting from global agricultural trade or production for domestic consumption. Thus, a major outcome in Buenos Aires should be to reduce the amount of subsidies under the “domestic support” negotiations – including subsidies in the so-called “Green Box” category of subsidies when these actually have trade-distorting impacts.
Given the existing subsidies, developing countries should also be able to increase tariffs to protect domestic production when faced with import surges. Unfortunately, some countries are opposing negotiations towards a workable “Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM)” for developing countries. An outcome on SSM – unconditioned on further tariff cuts – at the upcoming Ministerial would greatly enhance developing countries’ ability to achieve food security, promote rural development and safeguard farmers’ livelihoods – and would be a step towards removing WTO constraints on Food Sovereignty.
By contrast, most developing countries are only allowed miniscule subsidies. But the SDGs entreat countries to increase investment in sustainable agriculture. Also, there is growing acceptance of the “right to food” as a human right. One of the international best practices for supporting farmers’ livelihoods, ensuring food security, and promoting rural development is “public stockholding,” in which governments guarantee farmers a minimum price for their production, and distribute that food to hungry people within their own borders. But these programs, implemented in dozens developing countries, often run afoul of WTO rules – even though the agriculture supported is not traded in global markets.
The majority of WTO members have agreed that domestic public stockholding programs should not be constrained by antiquated WTO rules. But the changes have been steadfastly blocked by the United States, the EU, Australia and other big agribusiness exporters. And now reality is being turned on its head as China and India are being accused of being the biggest subsidizers, when their payments per farmer on a per capita basis remain miniscule – only a few hundred dollars per farmer, as compared to tens of thousands for the United States.
WTO members agreed to find a permanent solution to the public stockholding programs by December of this year. Unfortunately the positions of countries representing big agribusiness exporters have remained entrenched. In Buenos Aires WTO members must deliver a positive resolution on the public stockholding issue that allows all developing countries to implement food security programs without onerous restrictions that are not even demanded of developed countries’ trade distorting subsidies.
More Flexibility for Development Policies
Along with transforming the global rules governing agricultural trade, developing countries have long advocated for other changes to the existing WTO to increase flexibility for them to enable them to enact policies that would promote their own development.
The group of 90 developing countries has made concrete proposals for changes to existing WTO rules that would remove some WTO constraints on national pro-development policies. Many of them are updated versions of the “Implementation Agenda” that have formed the basis of developing country critiques of the existing WTO since the time of its foundation. These include, for example, changes to allow developing countries to promote domestic manufacturing capabilities, stimulate the transfer of technology, promote access to affordable medicines, and safeguard regional integration. Many of these proposals parallel the civil society demands encompassed in the OWINFS Turnaround Statement. The G90 proposals should be accepted in the Buenos Aires Ministerial as proposed – without being conditioned on further market access concessions from developing countries.
Even in an area that all WTO members should be able to agree on – ensuring benefits for Least Developed Countries (LDCs) – there is no consensus yet. Although it was a priority mandate, the small LDC package agreed in the WTO Ministerial in Bali in 2013 is not yet operationalized. This includes ensuring 100 percent Duty Free, Quota Free market access for LDCs’ exports; simplification of the Rules of Origin that define how much of the value of a product has to be produced in the country to qualify for reduced-tariff benefits; and providing actual binding commitments for the LDC services waiver (which allows developed countries to provide market access in services for LDCs without offering reciprocal access to other countries – a “flexibility” which has proven almost impossible to utilize). It also includes mandated reductions in the subsidies that the US and the EU provide to cotton producers – which enrich a few thousand there, but that have unfairly decimated production of hundreds of thousands of cotton farmers in Africa. This modest LDC package must be strengthened and made operational by the time of MC11.
Much is at stake this December in Buenos Aires. We believe in a democratic, transparent, and sustainable multilateral trading system, and do not want to see the WTO depart even further from that ideal. The secretive and anti-democratic practice of negotiating behind closed doors with only certain powerful members, and then bringing massive pressure to bear on developing countries to accept another bad deal, which has characterized the WTO since its inception but has become even more pronounced in the last two Ministerials, must be abandoned in favor of a transparent and member-driven process that leads to outcomes that are consistent with the multilaterally-agreed Sustainable Development Goals.
Will members agree to a harmful new mandate on e-commerce and new rules limiting the democratic oversight over services regulations? And new rules on fishing subsidies which end up harming poor fisherfolk? Or will members act in the interest of their citizens and change course at the WTO, removing WTO constraints over domestic policies that promote food security and development, and supporting LDCs in their efforts to increase their share of global trade?
We urge you to make the right decision for a positive outcome at the upcoming MC11 in Buenos Aires.
Sincerely,
Endorsers as of October 16, 2017:
International and Regional Networks
1. | ACP Civil Society Forum | The Forum is a coalition of 80 not-for-profit organisations working on issues relating to ACP-EU development cooperation. It seeks to cater for the diverse range civil society development issues within the wide geographic coverage of the ACP group. |
2. | Africa Network for Environment and Economic Justice (ANEEJ) | ANEEJ is a non-government organization whose goal is to amplify the voice of the weak, the less privileged and the marginalized groups in the society including women, youths, and People Living With Disabilities in order to increase their participation in the democratic decision-making process. |
3. | African Women Economic Policy Network (AWEPON) | AWEPON is a women’s Pan African organization with memberships in 22 African countries with an ultimate goal of influencing policies that are harmful to women and the poor population at large. |
4. | Arab NGO Network for Development (ANND) | ANND is a regional network, working in 12 Arab countries with seven national networks (with an extended membership of 200 CSOs from different backgrounds) and 23 NGO members. |
5. | Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development (APWLD) | APWLD is a network of 218 women's rights organisations and movements in 26 countries across the Asia Pacific region working toward the achievement of women's human rights and Development Justice. |
6. | Association of Women's Rights in Development (AWID) | AWID is a global feminist organization with membership in 164 countries. |
7. | Confederacio?n Latinoamericana y del Caribe de Trabajadores Estatales (CLATE) | CLATE es una organización sindical internacional que reúne a sindicatos de trabajadores del sector público de 17 países de América Latina y el Caribe. Fue fundada en 1967 y está integrada por más de 26 organizaciones sindicales de la región. |
8. | Coordinadora de Centrales Sindicales del Cono Sur (CCSCS) | La Coordinadora de Centrales Sindicales del Cono Sur nuclea a 20 centrales de Argentina, Brasil, Chile, Bolivia, Paraguay y Uruguay. |
9. | Development Alternatives with Women for a New Era (DAWN) | DAWN is a network of feminist scholars, researchers and activists from the economic South working for economic and gender justice and sustainable and democratic development. |
10. | Ecowas Network on Debt and Development (ECONDAD) | ECONDAD is a network of civil society organizations working on debt and economic justice from ECOWAS (Economic Community of West African States). |
11. | Education International (EI) | Education International is a global union federation of teachers' trade unions consisting of 401 member organisations in 172 countries and territories that represents over 30 million education personnel from pre-school through university. |
12. | European Federation of Public Service Unions (EPSU) | EPSU is the largest federation of the ETUC and is the regional organization of Public Services International (PSI). It comprises 8 million public service workers from over 265 trade unions, including in the energy, water and waste sectors, health and social services and local and national administration, in all European countries including in the EU’s Eastern Neighborhood. |
13. | Fair Trade Advocacy Office | The Fair Trade Advocacy Office is a joint advocacy initiative of the two main global Fair Trade networks: Fairtrade International and the World Fair Trade Organisation. FOEI is the world’s largest grassroots environmental network, uniting 75 national member groups and some 5,000 local activist groups on every continent counting over 2 million members and supporters around the world. |
14. | Friends of the Earth International (FOEI) | FOEI is the world’s largest grassroots environmental network, uniting 75 national member groups and some 5,000 local activist groups on every continent with over 2 million members around the world. |
15. | Internacional de Servicios Publicos (ISP) Interamericas | En América del Norte, Central y del Sur, y el Caribe la ISP cuenta con 140 organizaciones sindicales afiliadas en 35 países, que representan a un total de 3,3 millones de trabajadores afiliados. |
16. | International Federation of Musicians (FIM) | The FIM, founded in 1948, is the international organisation for musicians’ unions and equivalent representative organisations, including 70 members in 60 countries throughout the world. |
17. | International Grail Justice in Trade Agreement Network | A coalition of groups working for peace and justice in 20 countries worldwide. |
18. | International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers' Associations (IUF) | The IUF is currently composed of 385 trade unions in 123 countries representing a combined representational membership of over 12 million workers (including a financial membership of 2.6 million). |
19. | Just Net Coalition | The Just Net Coalition is a global network of civil society actors committed to an open, free, just and equitable Internet. |
20. | LDC Watch | LDC Watch is a global alliance of national, regional and international civil society organisations (CSOs), networks and movements based in the Least Developed Countries (LDCs). |
21. | Mesa de Coordinación Latinoamericana de Comercio | A network of fair trade groups from Latin America and the Caribbean. |
22. | Movimiento M4
| M4 apoya la defensa de la vida, la tierra y territorios, resistiendo a proyectos contrarios a los intereses de los pueblos. |
23. | Pacific Network on Globalization (PANG) | The Pacific Network on Globalisation is a regional network focused on promoting economic self-determination and justice in the Pacific Islands. |
24. | Pan African NGO Consortium on Agriculture | A network of organizations from throughout Africa working on issues of agriculture and development. |
25. | PRESSENZA International News Agency | PRESSENZA es una Agencia Internacional de Noticias de Paz y Noviolencia. |
26. | Public Services International (PSI) | Public Services International (PSI) is a global trade union federation dedicated to promoting quality public services in every part of the world. PSI brings together more than 20 million workers, represented by 650 unions in 150 countries and territories. |
27. | la Red de Educación Popular Entre Mujeres América Latina y El Caribe -REPEM-
| La Red es un espacio de encuentro y construcción colectiva de nuestra identidad como mujeres tejedoras de pensamiento, y de una apuesta política por una educación a lo largo de toda la vida no sexista, incluyente, y sin discriminación para las niñas y las mujeres. |
28. | Red de Género y Comercio - Capítulo Latino-americano | Fue crada em 1999 como parte de la red Internacional de Genero y Comercio IGTN e ha continuado acompanhando los temas comerciales y sus impactos de género, en los TLCs, TBIs y en el ambito multilateral de la OMC. |
29. | Red Intercontinental de Economia Social y Solidaria de Latinoamerica RIPESS-LAC | RIPESS-LAC is a network of CSOs in Latin America working on economic justice and alternatives to neoliberalism. |
30. | Society for International Development (SID) | SID is an international network of individuals and organizations founded in 1957 to promote participative, pluralistic and sustainable development. |
31. | Southern Africa Development Community Council of Non Governmental Organisations (SADC-CNGO) | SADC-CNGO is a regional umbrella body of NGOs operating in all the 15 Member States of the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC). SADC-CNGO was formed in 1998 with the aim of facilitating effective and meaningful engagement between civil society in the region and SADC institutions at national, regional, continental and global levels. |
32. | Southern Africa Trade Union Coordination Council (SATUCC) | SATUCC brings together 21 national trade union federation in the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) with a combined membership of 6 million working women and men. |
33. | Third World Network (TWN) | TWN is an independent non-profit international network of organisations and individuals involved in issues relating to development, developing countries and North-South affairs. |
34. | Third World Network - Africa | TWN-Africa is the autonomous African section of the Third World Network, an independent coalition of organisations and individuals engaged in advocacy on issues related to development, environment, and North-South affairs. |
35. | UNI Americas | UNI Americas represents 4 million workers in the Americas and the Caribbean. We are part of the 20-million strong UNI Global Union family which has affiliated 900 unions in 140 countries globally. |
36. | Unión Latina de Economía Política de la Información, la Comunicación y la Cultura (ULEPICC) | ULEPICC es una asociación científica internacional de pensamiento crítico lo cual, desde 2002, aborda las transformaciones de las industrias culturales y las formas de poder, acceso y control de la información, la cultura y el conocimiento. |
37. | West African Institute for Trade and Development | An institute of scholars from West African countries that advocate on trade and development issues. |
38. | Women in Development Europe (WIDE+) | WIDE+ is the network that follows up the previous WIDE network (a member of Seattle to Brussels, S2B), composed of feminists, NGO's, and researchers who advocate for a socially just economy. |
National Organizations
39. | Trade Union of Building, Wood and Public Service of Albania (FSNDSHPSH) | Albania |
40. | Anguilla Civil Service Association | Anguilla |
41. | Antigua & Barbuda Public Service Association (ABPSA) | Antigua & Barbuda |
42. | Antigua & Barbuda Trade Union Congress (ABTUC) | Antigua & Barbuda |
43. | Antigua & Barbuda Workers' Union | Antigua & Barbuda |
44. | Amigos de la Tierra Argentina
| Argentina |
45. | Confederación General del Trabajo de la República Argentina (CGT) | Argentina |
46. | Confederación de Trabajadores Municipales (CTM) | Argentina |
47. | Federación Argentina de Empleados de Comercio y Servicios (FAECYS) | Argentina |
48. | Foro Ciudadano de Participación por la Justicia y los Derechos Humanos (FOCO) | Argentina |
49. | Fundación Vía Libre | Argentina |
50. | Instituto Justiça Fiscal | Argentina |
51. | Unión del Personal Civil de la Nación (UPCN) | Argentina |
52. | World Labour Institute Julio Godio - UNTREF | Argentina |
53. | Australian Fair Trade and Investment Network | Australia |
54. | New South Wales Nurses and Midwives Association | Australia |
55. | Information Group on Latin America (IGLA) | Austria |
56. | Bahrain Transparency Society | Bahrain |
57. | Bangladesh Krishok Federation | Bangladesh |
58. | Bangladesh Women Welfare Workers Union (BWWWU) | Bangladesh |
59. | COAST Trust | Bangladesh |
60. | Gonoshasthaya Kendra | Bangladesh |
61. | Sramik Karmachari Union PGCBSKU, Dhaka | Bangladesh |
62. | VOICE | Bangladesh |
63. | The National Union of Public Workers | Barbados |
64. | 11.11.11 | Belgium |
65. | Centrale Générale des Services Publics (CGSP) | Belgium |
66. | CNCD-11.11.11 (Centre national de coopération au développement) | Belgium |
67. | Confédération des Syndicats Chrétiens, the Confederation of Christian Trade Unions (ACV-CSC) | Belgium |
68. | National Alliance of Christian Mutual Health Funds (ANMC-LCM) / Alliance Nationale des Mutualités Chrétiennes (ANMC) | Belgium |
69. | SOS Faim Belgique | Belgium |
70. | Public Service Union of Belize | Belize |
71. | Bermuda Public Services Union | Bermuda |
72. | Fundación REDES de Bolivia | Bolivia |
73. | Plataforma Boliviana frente al Cambio Climático | Bolivia |
74. | A Casa 8 de Março - Organização feminista do Tocantins | Brazil |
75. | Articulação de Mulheres Brasileiras (AMB) | Brazil |
76. | CONTAG | Brazil |
77. | Federação dos Trabalhadores Municipais de Santa Catarina (FETRAM-SC/CUT) | Brazil |
78. | Federação Nacional dos Servidores do Judiciário nos Estados (FENAJUD) | Brazil |
79. | GAPARS - Grupo de Apoio A Prevenção da AIDS do RS | Brazil |
80. | Gestos (HIV and AIDS, Communication, Gender) | Brazil |
81. | INESC | Brazil |
82. | Instituto EQUIT - Genero, Economia e Cidadania Global | Brazil |
83. | Jubileo Sul – Brasil | Brazil |
84. | Rede Brasileira Pela Integração dos Povos (REBRIP) | Brazil |
85. | Rede Social de Justiça e Direitos Humanos | Brazil |
86. | Sindicato dos Enfermeiros no Estado de Pernambuco (SEEPE) | Brazil |
87. | Sindicato dos Trabalhadores Públicos da Saúde no Estado de São Paulo (SINDSAUPE/SP) | Brazil |
88. | SOS Corpo - Instituto Feminista para a Democracia | Brazil |
89. | União Geral dos Trabalhadores (UGT) | Brazil |
90. | Cambodian Food and Service Workers' Federation (CFSWF) | Cambodia |
91. | Social Action for Change | Cambodia |
92. | Africa Development Interchange Network (ADIN) | Cameroon |
93. | Réseau National de l’Économie Sociale et Solidaire du Cameroun (RESSCAM) | Cameroon |
94. | Council of Canadians | Canada |
95. | National Union of Public and General Employees (NUPGE) | Canada |
96. | Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) | Canada |
97. | Réseau québécois sur l'intégration continentale (RQIC) | Canada |
98. | Syndicat de la fonction publique et parapublique du Québec (SFPQ) | Canada |
99. | Syndicat de professionnelles et professionnels du gouvernement du Québec | Canada |
100. | AFRICANDO | Canary Islands |
101. | Confederación Nacional de Funcionarios de Salud Municipal (CONFUSAM-Chile) | Chile |
102. | Corporacion Innovarte | Chile |
103. | Federación Nacional de Trabajadores de Obras Sanitarias (FENATRAOS-Chile) | Chile |
104. | Políticas Farmacéuticas CEPFAR | Chile |
105. | Federación Nacional de Profesionales Universitarios de los Servicios de Salud (FENPRUSS) | Chile |
106. | Asociacion Ambiente y Sociedad | Colombia |
107. | Camara Colombiana de la Economia Social y Solidaria (CCESS) | Colombia |
108. | Comité Ambiental en Defensa de la Vida | Colombia |
109. | Federación de Vocales de Control de los Servicios Públicos de la Región Centro y Bogotá | Colombia |
110. | Federacio?n Nacional de Entidades Acreditadas para Impartir Educacion Solidaria (FENALSE) | Colombia |
111. | Fundacio?n Colombia Digna (FUNCOLDIG) | Colombia |
112. | Grupo de Investigación en Derechos Colectivos y Ambientales (GIDCA) | Colombia |
113. | Red Educacion Popular Entre Mujeres (REPEM) | Colombia |
114. | SINTRACUAVALLE | Colombia |
115. | Asociación Nacional de Educadores de Costa Rica (ANDE) | Costa Rica |
116. | Friends of the Earth/Amigos de la Tierra Costa Rica (COECOCEIBA) | Costa Rica |
117. | Sindicato de Empleados del Ministerio de Hacienda (SINDHAC) | Costa Rica |
118. | Confederacion Nacional de Unidad Sindical (CNUS) | Dominican Republic |
119. | La Fundación Étnica Integral (La FEI) | Dominican Republic |
120. | Sindicato Nacional de Enfermería (SINATRAE) | Dominican Republic |
121. | Asociación Latinoamericana de Educación y Comunicación Popular (ALER) | Ecuador |
122. | Colectivo El Punto | Ecuador |
123. | Comité de Empresa de los Trabajadores de ETAPA EP | Ecuador |
124. | El Centro de Documentación en Derechos Humanos “Segundo Montes Mozo S.J.” (CSMM) | Ecuador |
125. | Movimiento de Economía Social y Solidaria del Ecuador (MESSE) | Ecuador |
126. | Ojo al Dato | Ecuador |
127. | Sindicato de Trabajadores del Instituto Salvadoreño del Seguro Social (STISSS) | El Salvador |
128. | Grenada Public Workers Union | Grenada |
129. | Fairtrade Finland | Finland |
130. | Finnish NGDO Platform to the EU Kehys | Finland |
131. | Kepa (a former Service Centre for Development Cooperation) | Finland |
132. | Pro Ethical Trade Finland | Finland |
133. | SOL | France |
134. | Worldview-The Gambia | Gambia |
135. | Brot für die Welt/Bread for the World, Germany | Germany |
136. | Ecumenical Service on Southern Africa (KASA) | Germany |
137. | Forschungs- und Dokumentationszentrum Chile-Lateinamerika e.V. (FDCL) | Germany |
138. | Advocates & Trainers for Children & Women's Advancement & Rights (ATCWAR) | Ghana |
139. | Friends of Forest Reserves and Verging Groves | Ghana |
140. | Consumer Association the Quality of Life (EKPIZO) | Greece |
141. | Naturefriends | Greece |
142. | STOP TTIP CETA TiSA - Greece | Greece |
143. | Confédération des Travailleurs des Secteurs Public et Privé (CTSP) | Haiti |
144. | Friends of the Earth/Amigos de la Tierra Haiti/Suirve | Haiti |
145. | Plateforme haïtienne de Plaidoyer pour un Développement Alternatif (PAPDA) | Haiti |
146. | Platfom Rezistans Peyizan Latibonit (PREPLA) | Haiti |
147. | Asociación Madre Tierra | Honduras |
148. | Alliance for Sustainable & Holistic Agriculture (ASHA) | India |
149. | Anti-FTA Committee | India |
150. | Centre for Research and Advocacy, Manipur | India |
151. | Diverse Women for Diversity | India |
152. | Forum Against FTAs | India |
153. | Gene Campaign | India |
154. | Hazards Centre | India |
155. | Indian Social Action Forum (INSAF) | India |
156. | Initiative for Health & Equity in Society | India |
157. | IT for Change | India |
158. | Kheti Virasat Mission | India |
159. | KIRDTI, Odisha | India |
160. | Madhyam | India |
161. | Nagpur Municipal Corporation Employees Union | India |
162. | National Organisation of Government Employees | India |
163. | New Trade Union Initiative (NTUI) | India |
164. | Sunray Harvesters | India |
165. | Tamil Nadu Federation of Women Farmers' Rights (TNFWFR) | India |
166. | Tamil Nadu Women's Forum (TNWF) | India |
167. | Friends of the Earth Indonesia/WALHI | Indonesia |
168. | Indonesia for Global Justice | Indonesia |
169. | LIPS (Sedane Labor Resource Center) | Indonesia |
170. | Trocaire Ireland | Ireland |
171. | Fairwatch | Italy |
172. | Jamaica Civil Service Association | Jamaica |
173. | Phenix Center for Economic Studies | Jordan |
174. | Building Eastern Africa Community Network (BEACON) | Kenya |
175. | Growth Partners Africa | Kenya |
176. | Kenya Food Rights Alliance (KeFRA) | Kenya |
177. | Kenya Network of Grassroots Organisations (K.E.N.G.O) | Kenya |
178. | Kenya Small Scale Farmer's Forum | Kenya |
179. | Lebanon Support | Lebanon |
180. | Lebanese Trade Union Training Center | Lebanon |
181. | National Federation of Workers and Employees trade unions (FENASOL) | Lebanon |
182. | NGOs platform of Saida | Lebanon |
183. | Consumers Protection Association (CPA) | Lesotho |
184. | Development for Peace Education (DPE) | Lesotho |
185. | Policy Analysis and Research Institute of Lesotho (PARIL) | Lesotho |
186. | Women and Youth Empowerment Forum (WYEF) | Libya |
187. | Plate-Forme Nationale des Organisations de la Société Civile de Madagascar (PFNOSCM) | Madagascar |
188. | Malawi Economic Justice Network (MEJN) | Malawi |
189. | Consumers Association of Penang | Malaysia |
190. | Friends of the Earth Malaysia/SAM | Malaysia |
191. | Fédération des Syndicats du Secteur Public | Mali |
192. | Reseau National d'Appui a la Prommotion de L'economie Sociale et Solidaire du Mali (RENAPESS MALI) | Mali |
193. | Association Action pour le Traitement des malades du Cœur (ACTC) | Mauritania |
194. | Mauritanian Network for Social Action / Réseau Mauritanien Pour L’Action Sociale | Mauritania |
195. | Center for Alternative Research and Studies (CARES) | Mauritius |
196. | Confederation of Free Trade Unions | Mauritius |
197. | Federation of Democratic Labour Unions | Mauritius |
198. | General Workers Federation | Mauritius |
199. | Government Services Employees Association | Mauritius |
200. | Local Authorities Employees Union | Mauritius |
201. | Mauritius Trade Union Congress (MTUC) | Mauritius |
202. | Migration and Sustainable Development Alliance | Mauritius |
203. | Resistance & Alternative | Mauritius |
204. | State and Other Employees Federation | Mauritius |
205. | Asociación Nacional de Industriales de Transformación (ANIT) | Mexico |
206. | Bia´lii, Asesoría e Investigación, A.C. | Mexico |
207. | Centro de Promoción y Educación Profesional "Vasco de Quiorga" | Mexico |
208. | Fundacion Mexicana para la Planeacion Familiar, AC (MEXFAM) | Mexico |
209. | Grupo Tacuba | Mexico |
210. | Otros Mundos Chiapas | Mexico |
211. | Procesos Integrales para la Autogestión de los Pueblos | Mexico |
212. | Red Mexicana de Acción frente al Libre Comercio (RMALC) | Mexico |
213. | Sindicato Único de Trabajadores del Gobierno de la Ciudad de México | Mexico |
214. | Unión Popular Valle Gómez, A.C. | Mexico |
215. | All Nepal Peasants’ Federation | Nepal |
216. | Greater Active Reconstruction & Justice Action Network-Nepal (GARJAN-Nepal) | Nepal |
217. | Health Professional Association of Nepal (HEPON) | Nepal |
218. | Nepal Civil Services Employees Union Association (NECSEUA) | Nepal |
219. | Nepal Film Workers Union (NFWU) | Nepal |
220. | Union of Public Services in Nepal (UPSIN) | Nepal |
221. | Both ENDS | Netherlands |
222. | It’s Our Future NZ | New Zealand |
223. | New Zealand Council of Trade Unions Te Kauae Kaimahi | New Zealand |
224. | New Zealand Public Service Association | New Zealand |
225. | Central de Trabajadores de la Salud (Fetsalud Granada) | Nicaragua |
226. | Centro de los Derechos del Campesino (CEDECAM) | Nicaragua |
227. | Red de Organizaciones Sociales de Managua | Nicaragua |
228. | Reseau des Organisations de Developpement et Associations de Defense de Droits de L’Homme et de la Democratie (RODADDHD) | Niger |
229. | Centre for Human Rights and Climate Change Research | Nigeria |
230. | Labour, Health and Human Rights Development Centre | Nigeria |
231. | National Association of Nigerian Traders (NANTS) | Nigeria |
232. | Folkeaksjonen mot TISA | Norway |
233. | All Pakistan Labour Federation (APLF) | Pakistan |
234. | Civil Society Support Program (CSSP) | Pakistan |
235. | NOOR Pakistan | Pakistan |
236. | Sustainable Development Vision (SDV) | Pakistan |
237. | Agricultural Development Association (PARC) | Palestine |
238. | Social and Economic Policies Monitor (Al Marsad) | Palestine |
239. | Catedratico Universitario | Panama |
240. | Colectivo Voces Ecológicas (COVEC) | Panama |
241. | Friends of the Earth/Papua New Guinea | Papua New Guinea |
242. | TEDIC | Paraguay |
243. | Confederación General de Trabajadores del Perú (CGTP) | Peru |
244. | Federación Nacional de Trabajadores de Agua Potable y Alcantarillado del Perú (FENTAP) | Peru |
245. | Grupo Red de Economia Solidaria del Peru (GRESP) | Peru |
246. | Instituto para el Desarrollo y la Paz Amazónica | Peru |
247. | Red Peruana de Comercio Justo y Consumo Ético | Peru |
248. | Red Uniendo Manos | Peru |
249. | Alliance of Filipino Workers | Philippines |
250. | Initiatives for Dialogue and Empowerment through Alternative Legal Services (IDEALS) | Philippines |
251. | Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates (PAHRA) | Philippines |
252. | Public Services Labor Independent Confederation (PSLINK) | Philippines |
253. | Fundacja Strefa Zieleni | Poland |
254. | Associação Sindical dos Profissionais da Inspeção Tributária e Aduaneira (APIT) | Portugal |
255. | Ole Siosiomaga Society Incorporated (OLSSI) | Samoa |
256. | Coalition Nationale Non aux APE | Senegal |
257. | Front Anti APE Anti CFA | Senegal |
258. | Pan Africain Association for Literacy and Adult Education (PAALAE) | Senegal |
259. | Personnels Civils des Armées des Services de Sécurité Publics Privés et Assimilés | Senegal |
260. | International-Lawyers.Org | Sierra Leone |
261. | Institute for Economic Research on Innovation | South Africa |
262. | National Public Service Workers Union | South Africa |
263. | Community Empowerment for Progress Organization (CEPO) | South Sudan |
264. | Amigos de la Tierra España | Spain |
265. | WDGpa - World Democratic Governance project association, Catalunya | Spain |
266. | Unión Universal Desarrollo Solidario | Spain |
267. | We Women Lanka Network | Sri Lanka |
268. | Public Service Union | St Vincent and the Grenadines |
269. | Gender Studies Centre | Sudan |
270. | Adetra, Trade Union of Worker's Defence | Switzerland |
271. | Alliance Sud | Switzerland |
272. | Association citoyenne pour la défense des usagers du service public (ACIDUS) | Switzerland |
273. | Association for Proper Internet Governance | Switzerland |
274. | Bread for All | Switzerland |
275. | Coalition Suisse pour la Diversité Culturelle | Switzerland |
276. | Fastenopfer | Switzerland |
277. | Public Eye | Switzerland |
278. | VPOD Switzerland, the trade union for public services | Switzerland |
279. | Governance Links Tanzania | Tanzania |
280. | Tanzania Trade and Economic Justice Forum (TTEJF) | Tanzania |
281. | La'o Hamutuk - Timor-Leste Institute for Development Monitoring and Analysis | Timor-Leste |
282. | Les Amis de la Terre-Togo | Togo |
283. | Ligue des Consommateurs du Togo (LCT) | Togo |
284. | National Union of Government and Federated Workers, Trinidad and Tobago | Trinidad & Tobago |
285. | Public Services Association of Trinidad and Tobago | Trinidad & Tobago |
286. | Tunisian Forum for Economic and Social Rights / Forum Tunisien Pour les Droits Economiques et Sociaux | Tunisia |
287. | Citizens Platform for Democracy and Accountability | Uganda |
288. | Southern and Eastern African Trade Information and Negotiations Institute (SEATINI) | Uganda |
289. | Global Justice Now! | United Kingdom |
290. | GMB trade union | United Kingdom |
291. | National Justice and Peace Network UK (England & Wales) | United Kingdom |
292. | Trade Justice Movement | United Kingdom |
293. | UNISON | United Kingdom |
294. | American Federation of Teachers | United States |
295. | Global Policy Forum (GPF) | United States/ Germany |
296. | Global Exchange | United States |
297. | Local Futures | United States |
298. | Sisters of Charity Federation | United States |
299. | Society of Catholic Medical Missionaries | United States |
300. | Washington Fair Trade Coalition | United States |
301. | Federación de Funcionarios de Obras Sanitarias del Estado | Uruguay |
302. | Instituto del Tercer Mundo | Uruguay |
303. | REDES-Amigos de la Tierra Uruguay | Uruguay |
304. | Red de Economistas del Uruguay (REDIU) | Uruguay |
305. | Coalición de Tendencias Clasistas (CTC-VZLA) | Venezuela |
306. | Equipo de Formacion, Informacion y Publicaciones (EFIP) | Venezuela |
307. | Social Democratic Forum | Yemen |
308. | Zambia Council for Social Development (ZCSD) | Zambia |
309. | Southern and Eastern African Trade Information and Negotiations Institute (SEATINI-Zimbabwe) | Zimbabwe |