Search

This study focuses on the demand for meat and the market vulnerabilities that apply to four selected Asian markets that are of potential importance to meat exporters. The markets identified for this purpose are Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, and Singapore. An initial overview of market prospects and vulnerabilities based on previous studies is reported. Detailed assessments of import demand and substitution between various meats for meat exports from Canada/Alberta to each of these markets was also undertaken. This required collection and analysis of extensive data relating to consumption and imports of major meat groups in the four Asian countries. Two different econometric models were applied. These included source-differentiated Almost Ideal Import Demand Systems and Multiple Competitive Interaction models. Detailed estimates are reported of the substitution tendencies, in the form of cross-elasticities between various meats (beef, pork, poultry and other) and between different sources of the various meats. Meat sources include Canada, the United States, European Union, Oceania, Developing Asia and others. Developing Asia exports reflect that Thailand, Taiwan and China are all major meat exporters to other countries in Asia; Latin America is also a significant exporter of beef to some countries in this region. Market share elasticities are negative and significant with respect to own prices in almost all cases in each of the four importing countries. Furthermore, the own price elasticities are elastic in the majority of cases except in the meat import market of South Korea. It can be concluded that the meat market in East Asia is very price responsive and that price is the most important determinant of meat market share in these countries. Cross-price elasticities may be grouped into two classes: cross price elasticities between same products from different sources (e.g., between U.S. beef and beef from Oceania in the Japanese beef import market) and cross price elasticities between goods (e.g., between U.S. beef and poultry from any source in the Japanese meat import market). Findings about cross product-price elasticities are not as conclusive as the own price elasticities. The cross-elasticities are positive only in 61 percent of the cases. In Indonesia, Japan, and Singapore, substitution relationships are more prevalent in pork import markets than in any other meat market, while in South Korea, such relationships are more prevalent in the beef import market than in any other meat market. This implies that competition is stiffer in the pork and beef markets of these countries. A combination of high expenditure elasticity for imports and inelastic own price elasticity for imports from a given exporter imply strong export potential for that export source in a given import market. The U.S. appears to enjoy such a position in Indonesia, Japan, and South Korea for most of the meats for which it is a major exporter. Canada faces elastic own price and expenditure elasticities in its pork exports to both Japan and South Korea, but inelastic own price and expenditure elasticities in the beef market of South Korea. Although East Asian meat import markets are dominated by the closely located exporters of Australia, New Zealand and some Asian countries, significant swings are observed in the market shares of these sources from time to time, particularly in Indonesia and South Korea. Thus there are real opportunities for more distant exporters, like Canada, to take advantage of these. This will require strategic planning, to build the information capacity to service these markets through knowledge of their preferences, organizations and trade practices. It will also require appropriate positioning, through aggressive, appropriately directed, effective promotion and development activities. Investment in market information is necessary to improve both capacity and positioning activities. Even so, price and quality are important features for the potential of export to these markets to be achieved. Investment in food safety provisions, and development of an associated "safe food" image is likely to be an important feature of reputation in this context.

This study evaluates the impacts of the Uruguay Round Agreement (URA) on Canadian agriculture in a single-country general equilibrium framework. For this purpose a computable general equilibrium model of the Canadian economy that involves six agricultural and two non-agricultural sectors was constructed and calibrated on 1991 data. To assess whether Canadian agriculture benefits from the URA, two sets of anticipated changes in world prices, taken from studies of the global effects of the URA, were introduced into the model exogenously. The simulation experiments show that the minimum increases in world prices from global studies are too small to offset the negative effects on agriculture of the reductions in tariffs, export subsidies and domestic support. However, if world prices were to change by the maximum level of global projections, Canadian agricultural producers gain from the URA. The sectors that benefit the most are wheat, other grains, and processed foods, for which production and exports increase appreciably. Imports of milk and poultry products increase substantially and livestock sector imports also increase. Labour and capital demand increase in agriculture, particularly in the wheat and other grains sectors. The highest increase in factor returns in agriculture is for agricultural land. Since the export prices applied above are exogenously determined, a third experiment is conducted to determine the extent of the world price changes for agricultural exports that would offset the negative effects on sectoral domestic production of the URA policy commitments. This would require world prices that are about eleven per cent higher than in the base period for wheat and about ten per cent higher for other grains. The greatest increase in prices--by nearly thirteen per cent--would be required for the milk and poultry sector. More modest changes in world prices for the other agricultural sectors are needed to offset the impacts of the reductions in sectoral support necessitated by the URA. Most of these price changes lie within the ranges of world price projections from studies of the global effects of the URA.

The subject of this study is the economic characteristics of Canada's export markets for foodgrains and feedgrains. The focus is on economic analysis of barley export markets. Over time Canada has become the largest barley exporter, replacing France as the leading source of barley. On the import side, developing countries have become the fastest growing market segment for barley imports, replacing developed countries as the leading market outlet. Canada's export profile data reveal that developing and Eastern European countries became expansionary markets in the 1980s while developed countries have imported a decreasing share of Canada's barley exports. Constant market share analyses of the world barley and course grain markets reveal that those exporters with the highest export concentration in the rapidly expanding markets in richer developing countries registered positive export growth impacts due to this concentration. While corn is still the dominant feedgrain traded on world markets, barley became, by 1985, the fastest growing feedgrain export, resulting in positive export growth for exporters, like Canada, for which barley is a prominent feedgrain. Despite appreciable reliance on less rapidly growing import markets for barley, Canada has ben relatively competitive in world barley markets, at least up to the mid 1980s. In wheat, Canada's exports have tended to be mroe concentrated on less rapidly growing market segmetns and on less rapidly growing classes of wheat. Canada's competitve position in world wheat markets has varied over time and, toward the end of the 1980s, was worsened by the United States export enhancement program subsidies. The major determinants of cereal import demand in seventy-four developed countries (LDCs) were analyzed through the use of an econometric cross-sectional model. Key explanators of import demand in these increasingly important markets included the level of income and degree of urbanization, financial capacity proxies, and domestic grain supply variables. A contribution to the study of cereal markets involved the analysis of the impact of income distribution on less developed countries' cereal import demand in1986 and 1987 for a more restricted sample of twenty-three nations. These developing countries exhibit a greater than proportional increase in cereal imports due to an increase in the income share of the poorest 40 percent of their populations. The inclusion of regional slope and intercept dummies in the cereal import demand model was an innovation that provided improved results. High levels of government debt appear to have inhibited cereal importation in nations in South America, but not in Asia and Africa. In all three continental regions, particularly in Africa, there is a positive relationship between food aid and cereal imports. The model predicts cereal imports for nations in Asia and South America more satisfactorily than for those in Africa. The results support the view that improvements in income distribution in developing nations would considerably stimulate cereal imports. In models where cereal imports were disaggregated into feedgrains and foodgrains, the estimated income elasticity of import demand for feedgrains is higher than that for foodgrains. In other words, feedgrain import demand is more sensitive to either upward or downward changes in income than is foodgrain import demand. This is one factor which helps to explain why feedgrain exports grew more rapidly in the 1970s and collapsed to a greater degree than wheat exports in the 1980s. World import demand for wheat appears to be relatively more "recession proof" than is the case for world barley imports. However, World barley markets show potential for greater future growth subject to improvements in the income levels of importing regions. Detailed time series studies of barley import demand in four Canadian export markets--the (former) USSR, Japan, Colombia and China—were undertaken. The results revealed that Russia's characteristic pattern of import fluctuations is caused mainly by domestic barley and livestock production fluctuations. The price of barley imports also affects USSR barley import decisions, implying financial constraints are an important aspect of the Soviet market. In the Japanese market, barley import demand underwent a structural shift around 1972 when usage of barley changed from a foodgrain to feedgrain. Canadian barley changed from an inferior foodgrain to a normal feedgrain, as reflected in the income elasticity of demand. The Canadian dollar-Japanese yen exchange rate is an important determinant of Japan's barley import demand. Colombia's import demand for barley has been influenced by barley import price and foreign exchange reserves. As a developing country, Columbia faces financial constraints that influence import decisions. For China, another developing country, barley imports are affected by the price of barley imports and by the price of wheat imports which is, for China, a substitute for barley imports. Domestic barley and hog production also influence this nation's barley imports. Overall, our empirical analysis supports the contention that the fortunes of the developed and the developing nations are closely intertwined in the world food economy. The pace at which poor nations can develop, both through increasing income levels and improving income distribution, significantly influences their cereal imports and, concomitantly, cereal exports from rich nations such as Canada. A successful conclusion to the negotiations within the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and efforts to improve the economic situation of developing countries will benefit the Canadian grain producing and exporting sector.

The major determinants of cereal import demand in seventy-four less developed countries (LDCs) were analyzed through the use of an econometric cross-sectional model. Key explanators included the level of income and degree of urbanization, financial capacity proxies, and domestic grain supply variables. A major innovation involved the analysis of the impact of income distribution on LDC cereal import demand in 1986 and 1987 for a more restricted sample of twenty-three nations. These developing countries exhibit a greater than proportional increase in cereal imports due to an increase in the income share of the poorest 40 percent of their populations. The inclusion of regional slipe and intercept drummies in the cereal import demand model also provided improved results. High levels of government debt appear to have inhibited cereal importation in nations in South America, but not in Asia and Africa. In all three continental regions, particularly in Africa, there is a positive relationship between food aid and cereal imports. The model predicts cereal imports for nations in Asia and South America more satisfactorily than those in Africa. Finally, the resuults support the view that improvements in income distribution in developing nations would considerably stimulate cereal imports.