CCP 05/11 |
|
CCP 05/11 |
COMMITTEE ON COMMODITY PROBLEMS |
Sixty-fifth Session |
Rome, Italy, 11-13 April 2005 |
FOOD SECURITY IN THE CONTEXT OF ECONOMIC AND TRADE POLICY REFORMS: INSIGHTS FROM COUNTRY EXPERIENCES |
1. This document summarizes the findings of, and the policy lessons that can be drawn from, case studies undertaken by the secretariat of the experience of 15 countries with economic and trade policy reforms over the past two decades, in relation to food security1. A synthesis of the studies and the main findings are summarized in section II. Policy implications are discussed in section III from the perspective of food security.
2. The structural characteristics of an economy, the existence and functioning of market institutions and the past policy context have an important bearing on the outcome of reforms and the appropriateness of alternative reform processes in country-specific contexts. This section describes briefly some relevant structural economic characteristics.
3. The countries in the sample are at different stages of development in the transformation from agrarian to industrialized economies. They vary from low-income agrarian economies (e.g. Malawi, Uganda, Tanzania), with the majority of their populations engaged in agricultural activities, to predominantly middle-income countries with relatively low rural population densities (e.g. Peru, Chile). In the middle income countries, structural transformations have already reduced the significance of agriculture to their national economies, to consumers and to rural incomes. India and especially China are special cases in this context because of their very large population, its distribution between rural and urban areas and the absolute size of their industrial sectors.
4. Most of the countries in the sample can be characterized as having the bulk of their agricultural production produced by small and resource poor farmers. Agriculture accounts for more than a fourth of GDP in nine of the 15 countries, exceeding 35 percent in five of them. Chile and Peru are the exceptions with agriculture accounting for less than ten percent of GDP in both cases.
5. In general, these structural characteristics imply differing impacts of liberalization on economy-wide effects and consumers’ welfare, and of trade policy changes on agriculture and the rural population. For the low-income agrarian countries, the impact of agricultural growth, by virtue of the greater importance of the sector at their stage of development, is likely to be much more important for reducing poverty than in middle-income countries. For this latter category of countries, although the incidence of poverty is greater in rural areas, the absolute number of poor is small compared to urban areas.
6. During the 1950s and 1960s, most of the governments of the countries in the sample intervened in their economies with the objective of accelerating the development process through rapid industrialization. The typical strategy pursued was one of import substitution the counterpart of which in the agricultural sector was one of food self-sufficiency.
7. The fundamental challenges (and dilemmas) faced were: (i) how to provide farmers with incentives to produce (i.e. remunerative and stable prices) while at the same time assuring the non-agricultural population (mainly urban dwellers/consumers) low prices of basic foods and agricultural supplies; (ii) how to correct for market failures (including missing markets) in the provision of basic services to the agricultural sector (e.g. regarding credit, essential inputs, technical and market information, marketing and distribution infrastructure, etc.). Most of the governments intervened to influence both output and input prices and to provide basic services to the agricultural sector. In some cases, the intervention covered all agricultural products, in other cases it was confined to only strategic products either for domestic consumption or exports.
8. From a macro perspective, many of the countries in the sample had experienced periods of relatively rapid economic growth in the 1960s and 1970s before economic deterioration led to the need for policy reforms. The reforms which were implemented were often precipitated by a crisis in the economy signalled by both low growth and serious macroeconomic disequilibria - high inflation, fiscal deficits, current account deficits, and financial sectors in critical trouble associated in part with the foreign debt crisis of the early 1900s. Such constraints induced significant budget cuts generally and - more relevantly for agriculture - specific cuts in subsidized credit, marketing programmes, and infrastructure.
9. In broad terms, the primary objective of the structural adjustment stability and liberalization programmes was to make domestic agriculture more market oriented. The principal policy strategy adopted to achieve this objective was reform on several fronts: a reduction in average protection, deregulation, privatization, and macroeconomic stability2. The most important elements of policy reforms relating to agricultural trade were:
10. The sequencing and depth of reforms implemented varied across the countries and in some cases there were policy reversals. However, by the early 1990s, tariffs had been substantially reduced in most of the sample countries and were further reduced by 2001 (see Table 1). In the specific case of agriculture, average applied tariffs in 2001 were below 25 percent in all the sample countries except three – Nigeria, Morocco and India. Non-tariff barriers had largely been replaced by tariffs. However, a major remaining issue was the desire of governments to protect their farm sectors from world price fluctuations and to counteract export subsidies.
11. The external economic environment of the past twenty years includes a secular downward trend in the real international market prices of many agricultural commodities, particularly maize, rice, coffee, cocoa, groundnuts and cotton. These declines have however been periodically reversed. Some products experienced more price fluctuations than others.
12. The movements in international prices are due to many factors. For most tropical commodities, such as coffee, cocoa and tea, over supply in relation to demand at the global level (due to increased productivity and the emergence of major new producers) has been the principal cause of the downward trend in the international prices. However, for basic foodstuffs such as cereals, meat, dairy products and edible oils, which are typically import-competing in the sample countries, depressed international prices have been principally due to the high levels of domestic and export subsidies employed by developed countries. The international agricultural markets most distorted by high levels of support and protection included cereals (wheat, maize and rice), sugar, dairy products, meats and oilseeds.
13. In the absence of domestic policy measures aimed at maintaining agricultural prices, the downward trend in international prices translates to a downward trend in real farm gate prices. This can also apply to semi tradable products like sorghum, millet, cassava and yams, whose prices tend to follow those of the major grains in the longer run.
14. In some cases, the reforms were associated with increases in most real domestic producer prices (e.g. Guyana, Nigeria, Tanzania and Uganda) in each period of reform. In other cases, there were periods of rising real producer prices and periods in which they fell (e.g., Kenya and Cameroon). In others, the reform periods were characterised by real price declines (e.g. Malawi and Guatemala).
15. The reasons for this heterogeneity in domestic price responses are complex, but the studies point to a number of key determinants. These can be broadly categorised as those that affect prices at the border, and those that modify the price within the domestic economy, whether these be due to direct price interventions or due to institutional factors. The periods of rising real domestic prices were generally associated with real exchange rate devaluations. Release of government controls over prices and marketing systems also led to gains in producer prices (especially for export crops) in some cases. On the other hand, import liberalisation appears to have contributed to a decline in the real domestic prices of some commodities.
16. Two examples are illustrative:
17. There is some evidence that output has responded positively to real price increases and negatively to decreases; however, this was not always the case. The pattern of production response was found to be almost identical for export crops and for food crops. Of the 150 episodes for which data are presented on both price and production changes, in only 66 percent of the cases is the response in the direction expected, with 34 percent of cases either reporting an increase in production when prices are falling, or a decrease in production in face of increasing prices. In Kenya and Tanzania, sectoral output dropped in spite of real price increases. Malawi and Peru show the opposite effect of increasing output across a range of products in spite of declining prices.
18. Thus overall, the picture is mixed regarding the apparent output response to price changes. This is suggestive of the fact that although producers respond to a combination of price incentives (determined both internationally and domestically), associated non-price constraints, or the alleviation of these, appear critical in determining whether a response occurs within the reform period (acknowledging that lags in response may explain in part these unexpected responses) and also the extent of the response.
19. As with the price changes, the reasons for the heterogeneity in production responses are many. Some have to do with changing world market conditions, as alluded to above. Where export opportunities increase as a consequence of the opening of a previously protected market, export expansion can occur despite falling international prices being more fully transmitted to domestic producers, as a result of concurrent reductions in local export restrictions. Similarly, increases in domestic prices may not reflect increased farm gate prices, as more powerful actors in the supply chain extract the increased rent associated with an increase in world prices. In other cases, domestic policy and institutional change can help to explain the production response. For example, substantial rises in input prices have dampened the potential stimulus of increases in output prices, in other cases the withdrawal of support for rural credit has affected production negatively.
20. There have been significant differences in the relative growth of agricultural exports and imports, and hence, in the direction of change of the ratio of food imports to agricultural exports among the sample countries (Table 2). After a period of strong growth in the first and/or second half of the 1980s, the growth rate of exports declined in the 1990s, falling sharply in the period 1992-97 for all countries except Senegal and Chile. In most cases this was associated with falling export prices rather than declines in volume. In some cases not only did the total value of exports expand, but trade liberalization appears to have encouraged a diversification of export products. While the economic significance of traditional, tropical exports continued, there was a notable growth in non-traditional crops (e.g., fruits from Chile and Guatemala, cut flowers and string beans from Kenya or asparagus from Peru). In contrast, food imports generally rose and on average faster than agricultural exports in most cases. The net effect on the agricultural trade balance varied across countries.
21. In many African countries, food imports have increased not only because of reductions in border measures and exchange rate movements, but also because in the 1990s per capita food production fell in a number of countries (e.g. Kenya, Senegal, Tanzania, and Morocco) – see Table 3.
22. The implications of reforms for food security are difficult to gauge directly, and are best captured through a series of indicators that encompass both macro (national aggregate) and micro (household) characteristics. Such indicators can be categorised according to the three main facets of food security: availability, stability and accessibility.
23. The aggregate per capita availability (supplied through domestic production and imports) of calories and protein, including changes since the 1980s are shown in Table 4. For all countries with the exception of Guatemala, Morocco, Tanzania and perhaps Senegal, per capita availability of these nutrients appears to have improved during the 1990s. Increases of calorie availability of more than 25 percent are noted for Ghana and Peru. For Chile, China, Guyana and Malawi, there were increases in calorie availability of ten percent or more during the 1990s.
24. The association of per capita food production with per capita availability of nutrients in the 1990s appears to be quite strong. The per capita food production index increased for 11 of the sample countries, including many significant improvements; however, for Kenya, Morocco, Senegal and Tanzania there was a worsening of this indicator that was particularly severe in the case of Morocco and Tanzania (see Table 3). Among the countries with declines in the production index, only Kenya escaped having declines in nutrient availability as well. In other words, even if foreign exchange per se is not a limiting factor, evidently other factors were at work that prevented food imports from making up the production shortfall. A probable linkage in this regard operates via the effect of production on rural incomes, and the dependence of nutrition on income levels. Lack of sufficient income translates into lack of sufficient purchasing power to induce the marketing system to bring in needed quantities of imports.
25. The share of food imports in total imports rose in the period after 1995 in all countries in the sample except China, India and Peru (see Table 5). A rising trend in this share reflects many factors, including population and economic growth, foreign exchange liberalization and relaxation of trade barrier. However, a rise in the ratio of food imports to total export earnings (goods and services) minus debt service suggests that food security at the national level (as reflected by the capacity to import) has become increasingly compromised. In the period after 1995, this ratio increased for eight of the countries in the sample, but declined for six others. It was particularly high (in excess of 20 percent) for Senegal, Tanzania and Uganda.
26. Any impact of policy on the availability, accessibility and stability of food supplies at the national level will be mediated by a range of institutional and regional parameters which affects what happens to individual households. Trends in household food security can be gauged from data on poverty and estimates of the undernourished.
27. Those countries that have experienced relatively strong rates of growth in real GDP per capita and/or in real agricultural value added per capita (including food production) over the past decade tend to report positive outcomes with respect to the number of people below the national poverty line (see Table 3). However it should be noted that the reductions in poverty have often not been consistent across all regions, or all categories of farmers, in these countries. For those countries for which data on extreme or food poverty (i.e. the proportion of households that cannot meet minimum nutritional requirements even if their entire consumption budget is spent on food) are available before and after reforms (e.g. Ghana, Tanzania, Morocco, Chile and Peru), changes in food poverty move in the same direction as overall poverty.
28. For those countries experiencing relatively small increases in real GDP over the past decade, the indicators for the poor are generally less encouraging. The case studies suggest therefore that the effects of the policy reforms on rural household incomes tend to depend very much on the agricultural sector performance, including food production, and the overall response of the economy. This linkage reflects the relative importance of farm, off-farm and remittances in rural household income. In those countries in which the growth indicators, post-reform, were inadequate, there was a greater possibility of a deepening of poverty.
29. In addition to being closely associated with poverty levels, food security is reflected in data on undernourishment. Table 3 summarises estimates of undernourishment and their trends. For most of the sample countries, the effects of reforms were felt between 1990 and 2001. In 2000, Tanzania had the highest rate of undernourishment, at 44 percent of the population, however, it was less than ten percent of the population in Guyana, Nigeria and Morocco and less than five percent in the case of Chile.
30. Over the period 1990/92 to 1999/02, FAO estimate of the proportion of the population undernourished declined in 11 of the 15 countries. The only countries for which the rate of undernourishment increased significantly were Tanzania and Guatemala. There is a strong correlation between changes in the prevalence of undernourishment during the 1990s and changes in average food availability, and in particular per capita food production (see Figure 2 and Table 3).
31. Within the agricultural sector of each country, reforms affected producers differently, depending upon cropping patterns. Producers of exports generally gained as well as wage-earners in production and processing in the export sector. By contrast, import-competing producers who lost some of their protection generally were adversely affected in the short-run. However, their long-run welfare depends on their capacity to increase productivity and/or change cropping patterns. In many cases, farmers had little flexibility to adjust their production and output mix, and as a consequence the losses of this subset of farmers were probably long term. The third group – producers of non-tradable goods – was generally less directly affected by trade reform, although it may have been harmed indirectly by consumers switching to lower-priced importables, or may have benefited indirectly from the higher price of exportables where this occurred. Small farmers tend to be producers of non-tradables, and the members of the household tend to be relatively more involved in rural non-farm labour. To the extent that increased employment opportunities became available in the rural non-farm economy, small farm households benefited due to the reform process. Whether or not greater employment was caused directly by trade liberalization is, however, unclear.
32. There were also differences in real income effects on urban and rural consumers. It is well known that low-income households, urban and rural, spend a large proportion of their incomes on food. To the extent that trade liberalization lowers food prices, household income of the net consuming poor may increase in real terms. Certainly low-income consumers (small farmers are often net consumers too) benefited from trade liberalization as lower protection reduced the price of food relative to wage rates. This is clearly the case for those countries in the sample where farmers are a small proportion of the population (e.g. Chile) and/or most farmers are wage earners. However, where agriculture accounts for a large share of employment and farmers are self-employed, the loss of income for low-income farmers may outweigh any real income effects through the importables in their consumption baskets.
33. A number of themes have emerged that seem to be reasonably consistent through most of the case studies and are worthy of consideration and further research. In summary form, those themes are as follows:
- The underlying premise of the domestic and trade policy reforms undertaken by countries in the sample was, with respect to the agricultural sector, that greater market orientation would improve the sector’s performance. However, the results from the reform experiences of the countries have been mixed. Where reform packages are carefully designed and implemented to ensure that positive results are generated for the poor, in the short and medium run as well as the long run, reforms are conducive to poverty reduction and improved food security.
- Greater attention needs to be paid to the sequencing of reforms in markets for inputs and outputs. Appropriate incentives on the side of outputs should be assured before (or at the same time as) input prices are raised, even at the cost of maintaining some well-targeted input subsidies during a transitional adjustment period.
- More thought should be given to ways to assist the private sector to fill more completely the gap left by dismantling State agricultural marketing institutions.
- Improving rural infrastructure is an important concomitant for successful policy reform in most countries, but it is particularly needed in low-income areas, along with support for productive investments by small farmers. Without such investments it is difficult for such farmers to respond to price incentives.
- Policies to encourage the development of rural non-farm employment are also important for the rural poor. These can include the development of micro-finance, simplification of regulatory regimes, infrastructure improvement, and special incentives for rural industrialization in poor areas.
- As complementary policies to facilitate adjustment of the kind mentioned above can take time to bear fruit, transitional compensatory measures, targeted on lower-income groups, may be needed. The absence of measures to protect the poor, and the problems of targeting the most vulnerable groups, were noted in several of the case studies.
- Looking to the WTO negotiations on agriculture, the most sensitive domestic trade policy debates centre on policy instruments to deal with import competing sectors. This is particularly so in those cases where international markets are distorted due to high levels of support and export subsidies by rich countries that can afford them.
- For countries with a large proportion of low income and resource poor people living in rural areas and who depend on agriculture, reforms aimed at raising productivity and at non-agricultural employment creation are essential for enhancing food security in the medium to long term. However, since such reforms may take some time to yield results, it seems preferable that these reforms be set in motion before (or at least at the same time as) implementing measures such as removing subsidies on agricultural inputs, and reducing tariffs on key crops grown by low-income households.
|
Figure 1: Evolution of real domestic prices and the real effective exchange rate, Chile and Ghana |
|
|
Chile |
|
| Real Domestic Prices of key commodities | Real Effective Exchange Rate |
 |
 |
| Source: Calculation based on data from country study. | Source: Calculation based on data from IMF, 2004 |
|
Ghana |
|
| Real Domestic Prices of key commodities | Real Effective Exchange Rate |
 |
 |
| Source: Calculation based on data from country study. | Source: Calculation based on data from IMF, 2004 |
|
Figure 2: Change in average food availability vs. change in under nutrition prevalence during the 1990s |
|
 |
|
Table 1: Average applied and bound MFN tariffs
|
APPLIED MFN TARIFFS (%) |
BOUND MFN TARIFFS (%) | ||||||
Year |
Agricultural products |
All products |
Year |
Agricultural products |
All products | |||
AFRICA |
||||||||
Cameroon |
1994 |
24 |
19 |
|||||
2002 |
24 |
18 |
1998 |
80 |
- | |||
Ghana |
1993 |
20 |
15 |
1995 |
97 |
92 | ||
2000 |
20 |
15 |
|
| ||||
Kenya |
1994 |
43 |
35 |
1996 |
97 |
96 | ||
2001 |
23 |
19 |
|
| ||||
Malawi |
1994 |
31 |
31 |
1996 |
111 |
76 | ||
2001 |
16 |
13 |
|
| ||||
Nigeria |
1988 |
37 |
34 |
|
| |||
2002 |
53 |
30 |
1995 |
150 |
119 | |||
Senegal |
2001 |
15 |
12 |
1996 |
30 |
30 | ||
Tanzania |
1993 |
28 |
20 |
1995 |
120 |
120 | ||
2003 |
20 |
14 |
|
| ||||
Uganda |
1994 |
25 |
17 |
1996 |
77 |
73 | ||
2003 |
13 |
9 |
|
| ||||
Morocco |
1993 |
29 |
25 |
1997 |
66 |
43 | ||
2003 |
52 |
33 |
|
| ||||
ASIA |
||||||||
China |
1992 |
46 |
43 |
|
| |||
2001 |
19 |
16 |
2001 |
14 |
10 | |||
India |
1990 |
66 |
66 |
|
| |||
2001 |
42 |
32 |
1996 |
115 |
49 | |||
LATIN AMERICA |
||||||||
Chile |
1992 |
11 |
11 |
|
| |||
2002 |
7 |
7 |
1999 |
26 |
25 | |||
Guatemala |
1995 |
14 |
10 |
|
| |||
2002 |
11 |
7 |
1999 |
51 |
38 | |||
Guyana |
1996 |
23 |
12 |
1998 |
93 |
58 | ||
2003 |
23 |
12 |
|
| ||||
Peru |
1993 |
18 |
18 |
|
| |||
2000 |
17 |
14 |
1998 |
31 |
30 | |||
| ||||||||
Table 2: Ratio of total value of food imports to total value of agricultural exports
|
COUNTRY |
AVERAGE RATIO |
||
|
1970-84 (a) |
1985-94 (b) |
1995-2002 (c) |
|
AFRICA |
|||
Cameroon |
0.2 |
0.3 |
0.3 |
Ghana |
0.2 |
0.4 |
0.6 |
Kenya |
0.2 |
0.2 |
0.4 |
Malawi |
0.1 |
0.2 |
0.2 |
Nigeria |
2.2 |
2.5 |
3.0 |
Senegal |
1.2 |
2.1 |
3.7 |
Tanzania |
0.2 |
0.3 |
0.5 |
Uganda |
0.1 |
0.2 |
0.4 |
Morocco |
1.3 |
1.1 |
1.6 |
ASIA |
|||
China |
0.8 |
0.5 |
0.7 |
India |
0.6 |
0.4 |
0.5 |
LATIN AMERICA |
|||
Chile |
2.8 |
0.2 |
0.3 |
Guatemala |
0.1 |
0.2 |
0.3 |
Guyana |
0.3 |
0.2 |
0.3 |
Peru |
1.2 |
1.9 |
1.4 |
|
|
|||
Table 3: Change in the proportion of the population undernourished,
food production, rural poverty and economic growth
|
Percentage of population undernourished |
Change in percent undernourished |
Real growth per capita food |
Incidence of rural poverty (%)b/ |
Real growth per capita
| ||||
GDP |
Ag. value | ||||||||
1979-1981 |
1990-1992 |
2000-02 |
1990/92-2000/02 |
1989/91-2001 |
Early 1990’s |
End 1990’s |
1990-2002 |
1990-2002 | |
AFRICA |
|||||||||
Cameroon |
22 |
33 |
25 |
-8 |
6 |
59.6 |
49.9 |
-1.2 |
2.0 |
Ghana |
64 |
35 |
13 |
-22 |
48 |
63.0 |
49.0 |
1.9 |
0.7 |
Kenya |
24 |
44 |
33 |
-11 |
-6 |
46.3 |
59.6 |
-0.7 |
-1.5 |
Malawi |
26 |
49 |
33 |
-16 |
67 |
- |
66.5 |
1.1 |
5.1 |
Nigeria |
39 |
13 |
9 |
-4 |
18 |
48.0 |
76.0 |
0.3 |
0.9 |
Senegal |
23 |
23 |
24 |
1 |
-3 |
- |
- |
1.0 |
-1.1 |
Tanzania |
28 |
35 |
44 |
9 |
-22 |
41.0 |
39.0 |
1.1 |
0.8 |
Uganda |
33 |
23 |
19 |
-4 |
1 |
59.4 |
39.0 |
3.6 |
1.0 |
Morocco |
10 |
6 |
7 |
1 |
-17 |
18.0 |
27.0 |
1.1 |
3.8 |
ASIA |
|||||||||
China |
30 |
17 |
11 |
-6 |
74 |
32.9 |
3.2 |
8.2 |
2.9 |
India |
38 |
25 |
21 |
-4 |
13 |
30.1 |
21.0 |
3.7 |
0.6 |
LATIN AMERICA |
|||||||||
Chile |
7 |
8 |
4 |
-4 |
25 |
39.5 |
23.8 |
4.2 |
1.6 |
Guatemala |
18 |
16 |
24 |
8 |
3 |
- |
- |
1.2 |
0.1 |
Guyana |
13 |
21 |
9 |
-12 |
84 |
45 |
40 |
3.5 |
3.8 |
Peru |
28 |
40 |
13 |
-27 |
51 |
70.8 |
64.8 |
1.3 |
2.0 |
|
a/ Overall per capita food production growth between 1989/91 and 2001 in 1989/91 constant prices. |
|||||||||
Table 4. Per capita availability of calories and protein 1980/80-1999/01
Calories (cal/day) |
Protein (g/day) | |||||
80-82 |
90-92 |
99-01 |
80-82 |
90-92 |
99-01 | |
Africa |
||||||
Cameroon |
2,260 |
2,123 |
2,240 |
57 |
51 |
56 |
Ghana |
1,661 |
2,094 |
2,621 |
38 |
46 |
54 |
Kenya |
2,164 |
1,924 |
2,044 |
56 |
51 |
53 |
Malawi |
2,269 |
1,886 |
2,164 |
66 |
51 |
54 |
Nigeria |
2,065 |
2,559 |
2,768 |
49 |
57 |
63 |
Senegal |
2,343 |
2,283 |
2,275 |
67 |
67 |
63 |
Tanzania |
2,186 |
2,078 |
1,970 |
54 |
51 |
48 |
Uganda |
2,139 |
2,291 |
2,371 |
49 |
55 |
57 |
Morocco |
2,772 |
3,017 |
3,002 |
73 |
84 |
81 |
| Asia | ||||||
China |
2,400 |
2,708 |
2,974 |
56 |
66 |
85 |
India |
2,067 |
2,368 |
2,492 |
51 |
57 |
59 |
| Latin America | ||||||
Chile |
2,646 |
2,612 |
2,851 |
71 |
73 |
78 |
Guatemala |
2,332 |
2,352 |
2,160 |
59 |
60 |
55 |
Guyana |
2,517 |
2,350 |
2,536 |
61 |
61 |
73 |
Peru |
2,143 |
1,979 |
2,602 |
55 |
49 |
64 |
|
|
||||||
Table 5: Indicators of food import dependence
|
Food imports as a % of total merchandise imports |
Change between 1985-89 and 1995-2001 |
Food imports as a % of total exports of goods and services minus debt service |
Change between 1985-89 and 1995-2001 | ||
1985-89 |
1995-2001 |
1985-89 |
1995-2001 | |||
AFRICA |
||||||
Cameroon |
11 |
12 |
1 |
8 |
8 |
0 |
Ghana |
9 |
10 |
1 |
19 |
14 |
-5 |
Kenya |
4 |
9 |
5 |
9 |
17 |
8 |
Malawi |
7 |
9 |
2 |
15 |
16 |
1 |
Nigeria |
12 |
13 |
1 |
19 |
9 |
-10 |
Senegal |
22 |
26 |
4 |
29 |
33 |
4 |
Tanzania |
5 |
14 |
9 |
23* |
26 |
3 |
Uganda |
4 |
7 |
3 |
11 |
23 |
12 |
Morocco |
11 |
12 |
1 |
19 |
18 |
-1 |
ASIA |
||||||
China |
4 |
2 |
-2 |
13 |
5 |
-8 |
India |
4 |
2 |
-2 |
11 |
6 |
-5 |
LATIN AMERICA |
||||||
Chile |
4 |
5 |
1 |
3 |
5 |
2 |
Guatemala |
7 |
11 |
4 |
12 |
15 |
3 |
Guyana |
8 |
13 |
5 |
9* |
11 |
2 |
Peru |
16 |
13 |
-3 |
20 |
17 |
-3 |
|
|
||||||
____________________
1 The case studies covered the following countries: in Asia: China, India; in Latin America and the Caribbean: Chile, Guat3emala, Guyana, Peru; in North Africa/Near East: Morocco; and in Sub-Saharan Africa: Cameroon, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, Senegal Tanzania, Uganda. For a discussion on the methodology used, see: FAO, Trade reforms and food security: Conceptualizing the linkages, FAO, Rome, 2003, chapter 11.
2 For a fuller discussion of this policy approach see FAO (FAO, 2003, chapter 6).