In an attempt to look ahead towards the year 2000, the results of FAO's production projections for total maize have been used as a starting point (FAO, 1994b). Assuming that the share of white maize in total maize output will not change significantly during the remainder of the decade12, white maize production would increase by about 3 percent annually from 54 million tons in the late 1980s to 77-78 million tons in 2000 (Table 9). Using the production projections for total maize to project white maize output may tend to overestimate somewhat the future growth of white maize because its production is linked fairly closely with demand for maize for food, rather than feed, consumption. Maize consumption as food is expected to grow more slowly than use of maize because of lower income elasticities for food than feed. Nevertheless, the projections appear to be on trend when compared to the average production values estimated for 1993-95.
12 The projections of white maize production are derived from the projections of total maize production in each country and the share of the total attributed to white maize (see Table 1).
Almost all of the increase in production would take place in the developing countries. In particular, for reasons explained below, future production of white maize in Asia could well be lower than projected in Table 9 for demand-driven reasons. In sub-Saharan Africa, supply-side constraints may reduce production below the projected figures. The highest rate of growth in production would occur in Central America, mainly in Mexico, followed by Africa and Asia. However, for a number of developing countries, output is projected to rise more slowly than population growth, which could increase the need for food imports if per caput consumption of white maize is to be maintained at the same level. For the developed countries, an upward trend is forecast only for the United States. In South Africa white maize production is expected to remain virtually unchanged from the average levels of the late 1980s.
TABLE 9 - White maize: estimated and projected production
|
|
Actual 1987-89 average |
Actual 1993-95 average |
Projected 2000 |
Growth Rates 1987-89 to 2000 |
|
|
thousands tons |
percent per year |
||||
|
DEVELOPING COUNTRIES |
48394 |
59428 |
71210 |
3.3 |
|
|
Africa |
21911 |
24337 |
31491 |
3.1 |
|
|
|
North Africa |
3942 |
5079 |
5700 |
3.1 |
|
|
Egypt |
3875 |
4993 |
5600 |
3.1 |
|
Western Africa |
3279 |
3848 |
4675 |
3.0 |
|
|
Central Africa |
1395 |
1785 |
2200 |
3.9 |
|
|
Eastern Africa |
12982 |
13346 |
18480 |
3.0 |
|
|
|
Kenya |
2671 |
2616 |
3423 |
2.1 |
|
|
Malawi |
1379 |
1578 |
2223 |
4.1 |
|
|
Tanzania, United Republic of |
2608 |
2336 |
3300 |
2.0 |
|
|
Zambia |
1622 |
1119 |
2173 |
2.5 |
|
|
Zimbabwe |
1670 |
1814 |
2556 |
3.6 |
|
Southern Africa |
313 |
267 |
436 |
2.8 |
|
|
Central America |
12848 |
19080 |
21024 |
4.2 |
|
|
Mexico |
10498 |
16640 |
18000 |
4.6 |
|
|
Caribbean |
69 |
72 |
88 |
2.1 |
|
|
South America |
2969 |
3250 |
3531 |
1.5 |
|
|
Asia |
10618 |
12689 |
15077 |
3.0 |
|
|
|
China |
3941 |
5246 |
6153 |
3.8 |
|
|
Indonesia |
2100 |
2517 |
3005 |
3.0 |
|
|
Philippines |
2866 |
2962 |
3635 |
2.0 |
|
DEVELOPED COUNTRIES |
5471 |
6316 |
6473 |
1.4 |
|
|
|
United States |
950 |
1672 |
2000 |
6.4 |
|
|
South Africa |
4448 |
4245 |
4400 |
-0.1 |
|
WORLD TOTAL |
53865 |
65744 |
77583 |
3.1 |
|
Source: FAO
The projected 4.6 percent annual expansion in white maize production in Mexico between 1987-89 and 2000 appears anomalous, given the 1.1 percent average annual growth rate in the preceding decade (Table 1). This apparent discrepancy, however, is related ,to the fact that the late 1980s, the base period for the projections and the closing period for the earlier calculations, was a time during which maize production in Mexico was particularly low. The projected level of 18 million metric tons in white maize production for the year 2000 does not appear unreasonable, given the fact that it surpassed 17 million metric tons in the mid-1990s. On a purely statistical basis, the actual medium- to long-term growth rate for white maize production in Mexico appears to be about 2.5 percent annually. Achieved levels of production crucially depend on policy variables, and to a certain extent, on weather. Market and trade liberalization changes under the domestic agricultural reform programme (PROCAMPO) and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) could affect the production of maize during the next few years. The net effect is not clear, however, due to potentially countervailing policies, i.e. domestic policies could encourage farmers to switch to alternative crops but could also dampen the domestic demand for maize, while trade policies are expected to limit imports. Maize output is often strongly influenced by the incentives larger producers in northern and central Mexico receive in order to produce maize, rather than alternative crops, under irrigation, and on the amount of irrigation water available in these areas.
Recent trends in production in eastern and southern Africa suggest that these regions may not succeed in expanding their white maize production at an average of about 3 percent per year. In the five major countries expected to raise future production, all had zero or negative growth rates in the ten years up through 1994 (Table 10). However, these negative growth rates are partially the result of an intense drought in 1992 and more localized droughts in 1994.
A look at an individual country such as Malawi is instructive. If the highly variable years in the series are left out, production grew at 2.8 percent per year between 1985 and 1991. All of that growth resulted from area expansion; over the same period yields declined at a statistically insignificant, but negative rate of -0.4 percent per year. Therefore, strong future expansion of production in Malawi would require substantial yield increases; these, in turn, would demand rapid diffusion of new, higher yielding varieties. While the diffusion of hybrid maize and fertilizer in the late 1980s and early 1990s in Malawi was encouraging, it may only have offset declining soil fertility resulting from continuous maize cultivation. In recent years, weather fluctuations combined with major changes in the institutions and policies supporting agriculture have called into question the future course of maize technology development and diffusion in Malawi (Heisey and Smale, 1995).
Looking at other important producers in the region (including Kenya, Zambia and Zimbabwe), some observers conclude that despite evidence of the adoption of modern practices by some producers, there have not been the dramatic gains in maize yields and productivity growth needed to achieve the growth rates projected under the assumptions made (Jayne et al., 1997).
The extremely rapid growth in maize demand in Asia is expected to derive primarily from growth in feed maize. Furthermore, in some regions within Asian countries where food maize consumption is important, yellow maize also serves as a food source. This is particularly true in India and Nepal, and to a lesser extent in Indonesia and Vietnam. Therefore, over the medium-term, white maize production in Asia is expected to grow more slowly than white maize production in other world regions, and more slowly than yellow maize production in Asia. As a result, the share of white maize in total maize production and consumption is likely to decline in some Asian countries.
In terms of trade, South Africa and Zimbabwe are expected to continue to supply surplus grain to the international market as regional trade has intensified over recent years. Future export supplies from South Africa and Zimbabwe, will, however, depend on the effects of recent deregulations of national cereal sectors under structural adjustment programmes and trade liberalization measures. Three other countries which exclusively produce white maize, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia, would have the production potential to join the ranks of exporters, provided that their production policies would stimulate output and that internal transport and storage problems can be solved. In these three countries, the export potential will also depend on the deployment of appropriate maize technologies; in Zambia in particular, it depends on incentives to expand the maize area. However, despite large production potentials, these countries are likely to remain borderline cases as long distances to port facilities and high transport costs make the cultivation and export of high value crops more profitable than that of white maize. In the western hemisphere, Colombia and Venezuela are anticipated to continue to be importers for the foreseeable future given their present production policies. However, the trading position of Mexico remains unclear until the combined impact on trade of PROCAMPO, other economic reforms as exemplified by the major currency devaluation at the end of 1994, and the NAFTA can be assessed more accurately. It has been assumed that maize imports will be limited by the tariff-free quotas established under the NAFTA, although these have been raised in recent years due to production shortfalls. The United States is expected to gear its export supplies primarily to the requirements of this and other Latin American and Caribbean markets.
TABLE 10 - White maize: production trends in selected African countries
|
|
Annual Growth Rate |
|
|
1961-1984 average |
1985-1994 average |
|
|
percent |
||
|
Kenya |
2.9 |
-1.7 |
|
Malawi |
2.4 |
-1.4 |
|
Tanzania |
5.7 |
0.0 |
|
Zambia |
1.8 |
-3.1 |
|
Zimbabwe |
1.8 |
-6.5 |
Source: FAO.
