International rice prices followed a downward trend during most of 1999, pressured by ample exportable supplies that exceeded the prevailing global import demand. Good harvests in a number of the major exporting countries coincided with a production recovery in many of the major importing countries resulting in a price depressing effect. The FAO Rice Export Price Index (1982-84=100) started the year with a monthly average of 125 points in January and ended it with an average of 105 points in December. For 1999 as a whole, the index averaged 114 points, down from 127 points in 1998 and the lowest since 1994. Prices for the lower quality rice grades were affected most, as import demand for such qualities was particularly weak.
World paddy output in 1999 is estimated to have returned to the trend prevailing in the 1990s after the disappointing 1998 season, when weather problems in major producing countries depressed growth. Supported by an expansion in area and generally favourable growing conditions, paddy production rose by 2 percent to 593 million tonnes in 1999, more than twice as fast as in 1998. Much of the increase was concentrated in Bangladesh, Brazil, Egypt and the Philippines, but increases took place also in Argentina, India, Indonesia and the United States. By contrast, output contracted in China, following the launching in 1998 of new policies geared towards enhancing quality grain production, which discouraged planting of early rice, considered to be an inferior grain. Smaller crops were also gathered in Myanmar and in the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Although increased harvests in several traditional importing countries resulted in reduced global imports, world trade reached almost 25 million tonnes in 1999, 2.8 million less than in the previous year, but still the second highest on record. Indonesia, Bangladesh and Brazil, whose purchases soared in 1998, continued to import sizeable volumes in 1999, albeit smaller than in the previous year. In addition, rice shipments to countries in the Near East affected by drought rose. Despite the drop in world trade, Thailand and Vietnam managed to export record high volumes by displacing higher cost producers such as India and Pakistan, owing to competitive pricing. The decline in global rice trade coupled with low world prices in 1999 is estimated to have caused a 19 percent fall in the value of exports.
While an increase in paddy production is expected in 2000, this might be modest as there are indications that low prices in 1999 have prompted some countries in the Southern Hemisphere to reduce plantings, including Australia, Argentina and Brazil. In addition, current policies in China could bring about a further cut in output. By contrast, Indonesia has already announced a production target that is about one million tonnes, or 2 percent higher than the actual 1999 crop. Good crops are also anticipated in the Philippines.
Given the outlook for higher harvests and large 1999 carry-over stocks in some of the major importing countries, the outlook for global trade in 2000 points to a reduced volume of transactions. On the import side, the introduction in Indonesia of a 30 percent tariff would also depress purchases by the country that has emerged as the leading rice importer since 1995. Measures to reduce import flows have also been taken by Madagascar, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. At the same time, prospects for smaller crops in South America, continued large consumption requirements in Africa and the Near East should help sustain import demand in those regions. On the export side, Thailand, Vietnam and the United States as well as India and Pakistan should be in a position to respond to such a demand.
Given the current expectation of reduced global import demand and ample export availability, international rice prices are likely to remain under pressure. However, the final outcome will largely depend on the performance of the crops, most of which are yet to be planted. Policies will also influence the market. In Thailand for instance, the Government intervened late last year to sustain domestic prices through increased procurement and storage and by arranging Government-to-Government trans-actions. Vietnam, on the other hand, is endeavour-ing to improve the quality of its export rice to satisfy the high end of the international market. Exchange rate movements will also be critical to the near term outlook for rice, as will the price of oil, the primary source of export earnings for several of the major rice importers. All these factors will play an important role in influencing world prices during the course of the year.
1994-96 Average |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 | |
Million tonnes | ||||
World total |
553.9 |
577.3 |
581.8 |
592.9 |
Bangladesh |
26.7 |
28.3 |
29.5 |
30.7 |
Brazil |
10.6 |
9.5 |
8.5 |
11.6 |
China |
187.4 |
202.8 |
200.6 |
200.0 |
EC |
2.3 |
2.8 |
2.6 |
2.6 |
Egypt |
4.8 |
5.5 |
4.5 |
5.8 |
India |
120.2 |
123.6 |
127.2 |
127.6 |
Indonesia |
49.2 |
49.4 |
49.2 |
49.9 |
Japan |
13.8 |
12.5 |
11.2 |
11.5 |
Pakistan |
5.8 |
6.5 |
7.1 |
7.3 |
Philippines |
10.9 |
10.0 |
10.3 |
11.9 |
Thailand |
22.0 |
22.6 |
22.8 |
23.3 |
United States |
8.2 |
8.3 |
8.5 |
9.5 |
Viet Nam |
26.2 |
28.9 |
31.0 |
30.7 |
1 Production refers to the calendar year in which the harvest or bulk of the harvest took place. | ||||
1994-96 Average |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 | |
Million tonnes | ||||
World total |
18.9 |
19.0 |
27.6 |
24.8 |
Argentina |
0.3 |
0.5 |
0.5 |
0.6 |
Australia |
0.6 |
0.7 |
0.6 |
0.7 |
China |
0.7 |
1.0 |
3.8 |
2.7 |
EC |
0.3 |
0.2 |
0.2 |
0.2 |
India |
2.9 |
2.0 |
4.5 |
2.6 |
Myanmar |
0.5 |
- |
0.1 |
0.1 |
Pakistan |
1.6 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
1.8 |
Thailand |
5.3 |
5.3 |
6.4 |
6.7 |
United States |
2.8 |
2.3 |
3.2 |
2.8 |
Uruguay |
0.5 |
0.6 |
0.7 |
0.8 |
Viet Nam |
2.3 |
3.6 |
3.8 |
4.6 |
1 Excludes re-exports | ||||
1994-96 Average |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 | ||
Million tonnes |
|||||
World total |
56.4 |
55.9 |
54.7 |
55.9 | |
Bangladesh |
2.2 |
1.4 |
1.4 |
1.5 | |
China |
11.8 |
12.3 |
14.2 |
14.5 | |
India |
20.1 |
17.0 |
16.6 |
17.7 | |
Indonesia |
5.2 |
5.4 |
3.7 |
3.7 | |
Thailand |
0.8 |
1.2 |
1.0 |
0.6 | |
United States |
0.9 |
0.9 |
0.9 |
0.7 | |
Viet Nam |
1.9 |
1.7 |
1.9 |
2.2 | |
1 At the end of national crop years. | |||||
1994-96 Average |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 | ||||
Million tonnes |
|||||||
World total |
18.9 |
18.7 |
27.6 |
24.8 | |||
Bangladesh |
0.7 |
- |
2.5 |
1.6 | |||
Brazil |
0.9 |
0.8 |
1.5 |
1.0 | |||
China |
1.2 |
0.3 |
0.2 |
0.2 | |||
EC |
0.7 |
0.7 |
0.6 |
0.6 | |||
Indonesia |
2.0 |
1.0 |
6.0 |
4.0 | |||
Iran, Isl. Rep. |
1.0 |
0.9 |
0.5 |
1.0 | |||
Japan |
1.0 |
0.6 |
0.5 |
0.7 | |||
Malaysia |
0.4 |
0.6 |
0.7 |
0.6 | |||
Nigeria |
0.3 |
0.7 |
0.7 |
0.9 | |||
Philippines |
0.4 |
0.9 |
2.1 |
1.2 | |||
Saudi Arabia |
0.8 |
0.7 |
0.8 |
0.9 | |||
Senegal |
0.4 |
0.4 |
0.6 |
0.6 | |||
1 Excludes re-exports. | |||||||
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 |
1999 |
1999 |
1999 | |
Jan-Mar |
Apr-Jun |
Jul-Sep |
Oct-Dec | ||||||
$/tonne | |||||||||
Thai 100% B |
289 |
336 |
352 |
316 |
315 |
283 |
250 |
247 |
231 |
Thai A1 Super |
186 |
268 |
234 |
214 |
215 |
212 |
190 |
200 |
164 |
Market situation in 1999/2000
Global wheat production in 1999 fell for the second consecutive year, albeit less than was initially expected. Unfavourable weather, particularly severe drought in the Near East and parts of North Africa as well as excessive rainfall at planting time in northern Europe, was mostly responsible for the decline. The rise in the compulsory set-aside in the EC, from 5 to 10 percent, and planting cutbacks by several wheat producers in response to low prices also had a negative impact on production, particularly on winter wheat plantings in the United States. However, the downward tendency was partially offset by favourable weather and higher yields in a number of countries. In Argentina, good weather boosted wheat output despite lower plantings, as farmers switched to more remunerative crops such as soyabeans. A bumper harvest in Australia reflected a slight rise in area and good yields. In Canada, higher spring wheat output more than offset a significant decline in durum wheat production. Elsewhere, India and Bangladesh harvested record crops while production increased also in China and several CIS countries, including the Russian Federation.
Given the decline in 1999 production and the expected rise in total wheat utilization in 1999/2000, mostly to meet higher food demand of the rising world population, it is likely that stocks will be drawn down. However, the overall decline in world stocks will be small. Moreover, it is likely that the ending stocks in major exporting countries will remain close to their relatively high opening levels. Purchasing decisions by importing countries seem to focus increasingly on meeting the bare minimum needed to cover immediate domestic utilization rather than on building up stocks. This may be one explanation for continuing weak international demand and low prices. This season, total exports by major exporters are expected to represent nearly 40 percent of their aggregate production. This would be up 5 percentage points from the previous year but not enough to result in any significant cut in their stocks, particularly in view of a possible decline in their total feed use of wheat due to abundance of other competing crops such as maize and barley.
Indeed, the market's current perception of excess supply mainly stems from continuing large exportable supplies rather than the overall size of global stocks. This view reinforces the speculative downward pressure on prices in the short-term and holds back larger purchases by importers in anticipation of more price cuts in the future. As it is reflected in the Chicago Board of Trade (CBOT) futures market, the soft red winter wheat May values remained continuously under downward pressure since the beginning of the season and between October and December were quoted at some US$10-18 per tonne below the corresponding period in the previous year. The small, and probably short-lived, recovery, observed in January was mostly in response to the unfavourable growing conditions in the United States and the reported decline in the US winter wheat area.
Outlook for 2000/01
Based on evaluation in early 2000 of the latest official and trade information and assuming average yields and normal growing conditions, the early outlook for 2000 wheat crop suggests a global production level close to 1999. While harvests in the southern hemisphere are at least one year away (from the time of this writing), in the northern hemisphere, a combination of higher yields and expanded plantings are expected to result in larger production. Favourable weather conditions in many parts of Asia and North Africa could boost production in countries adversely affected by drought in 1999. Wheat planting in the EC is forecast to rise as current large domestic supplies of rapeseed, combined with a reduction in aid to oilseeds under the first year of Agenda 2000 reform, could encourage larger wheat planting. In Canada, official estimates point to an increase in spring wheat area at the expense of canola and flaxseed because of their relative lower prices. By contrast, the winter wheat seeding in the United States was officially put at lowest level since 1972, as farmers responded to continuing low price prospects at planting time last autumn.
Also in China, according to the latest official estimates, winter wheat planting area is down nearly 7 percent from the previous year, mostly in response to low prices and the recent Government decision to eliminate support prices for low-quality winter wheat.
Against the background of abundant global exportable supplies and the current favourable 2000 production prospects, any underlying support for a sustained recovery in international wheat prices would mostly depend on the potential for much faster rise in global import demand during the 2000/01 marketing season. However, considering that the expansion in this year's trade mostly reflected large purchases by a few drought-stricken countries, the potential for a further rise in import demand next season could prove limited assuming a return to average yields. This could increase the chance of further accumulation of stocks, especially in major exporting countries, and more downward pressure on prices.
1994-96 Average |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 | ||
Million tonnes |
|||||
World total |
554.5 |
613.2 |
595.2 |
589.2 | |
Argentina |
12.2 |
14.8 |
11.5 |
14.2 | |
Australia |
16.7 |
19.4 |
21.1 |
22.8 | |
Canada |
26.0 |
24.3 |
24.1 |
26.9 | |
China |
104.0 |
123.3 |
109.7 |
113.0 | |
EC |
91.1 |
95.1 |
102.6 |
97.3 | |
India |
62.6 |
69.3 |
65.9 |
73.5 | |
Pakistan |
16.4 |
16.4 |
18.7 |
18.2 | |
Turkey |
18.0 |
18.7 |
21.0 |
18.0 | |
United States |
61.5 |
67.5 |
69.3 |
62.7 | |
Russian Federation |
34.3 |
44.3 |
30.0 |
32.4 | |
1994/95- 1996/97 Average |
1997/98 |
1998/99 |
1999/00 | ||
Million tonnes |
|||||
World total |
98.6 |
100.7 |
99.5 |
102.5 | |
Main exporters |
84.8 |
86.3 |
81.4 |
89.5 | |
Argentina |
7.2 |
8.9 |
8.3 |
10.0 | |
Australia |
12.8 |
15.1 |
16.1 |
17.0 | |
Canada |
18.7 |
21.1 |
13.9 |
18.5 | |
EC |
14.9 |
13.0 |
14.0 |
15.0 | |
United States |
31.1 |
28.1 |
29.0 |
29.0 | |
Others |
13.8 |
14.5 |
18.0 |
13.0 | |
Hungary |
1.6 |
1.6 |
1.5 |
0.6 | |
Romania |
0.7 |
0.9 |
0.5 |
0.3 | |
Turkey |
1.2 |
1.3 |
2.8 |
1.5 | |
Russian Federation |
0.6 |
1.0 |
1.4 |
0.5 | |
1 Trade season July/June.
1994/95- 1996/97 Average |
1997/98 |
1998/99 |
1999/00 | |||
Million tonnes |
||||||
World total |
110.0 |
135.2 |
139.2 |
134.2 | ||
Main exporters |
32.5 |
38.9 |
51.3 |
50.1 | ||
Argentina |
0.7 |
0.7 |
0.4 |
0.4 | ||
Australia |
2.2 |
1.5 |
1.7 |
2.0 | ||
Canada |
7.2 |
6.0 |
7.4 |
7.3 | ||
EC |
10.5 |
11.0 |
16.1 |
14.0 | ||
United States |
12.0 |
19.7 |
25.7 |
26.5 | ||
Others |
77.5 |
96.2 |
88.0 |
84.1 | ||
China |
13.9 |
24.7 |
19.7 |
16.7 | ||
Egypt |
0.5 |
1.4 |
1.6 |
1.6 | ||
India 2 |
7.8 |
10.0 |
11.5 |
14.0 | ||
Japan |
1.4 |
1.3 |
1.0 |
0.9 | ||
Russian Federation |
5.2 |
8.0 |
4.0 |
3.0 | ||
1 At
the end of national crop years.
2 Government stocks only.
|
1994/95- 1996/97 Average |
1997/98 |
1998/99 |
1999/00 | |||
|
Million tonnes |
||||||
|
World total |
99.6 |
100.3 |
97.1 |
102.5 | ||
|
Algeria |
4.0 |
4.6 |
4.3 |
4.5 | ||
|
Brazil |
5.9 |
5.6 |
7.0 |
6.3 | ||
|
China |
9.4 |
3.1 |
1.5 |
2.0 | ||
|
Egypt |
6.7 |
7.1 |
7.2 |
7.0 | ||
|
Indonesia |
3.8 |
4.0 |
2.9 |
3.1 | ||
|
Iran, Islamic Rep. |
4.3 |
4.0 |
3.2 |
6.0 | ||
|
Japan |
6.2 |
6.0 |
5.8 |
5.9 | ||
|
Korea, Rep. |
3.4 |
3.9 |
4.6 |
3.9 | ||
|
Morocco |
1.8 |
2.8 |
2.1 |
2.8 | ||
|
Russian Federation |
3.0 |
3.0 |
2.1 |
4.0 | ||
|
1 Trade season July/June. |
||||||
|
1994/95 |
1995/96 |
1996/97 |
1997/98 |
1998/99 |
1999/00 | |
|
$/tonne | ||||||
|
Argentina: Trigo pan2 |
136 |
218 |
157 |
137 |
118 |
111 |
|
US Hard Winter No.23 |
157 |
216 |
181 |
142 |
120 |
111 |
|
US Soft red Winter No.2 4 |
145 |
198 |
158 |
129 |
100 |
96 |
|
EC: Standard 5 |
129 |
210 |
170 |
134 |
101 |
95 |
|
Australia: Standard White 6 |
175 |
231 |
203 |
165 |
148 |
138 |
|
Sources: International Grain Council, USDA and
Reuters. | ||||||
During the first half of the 1999/2000 season, world coarse grain prices continued their downward trend since the price spike in 1995/96. Large exportable supplies and weak import demand have negatively influenced international coarse grain prices so far this season although some support has come from rising demand in Asia. For example, US maize export prices averaged around $89 per tonne from July to December 1999, 6 percent below the comparable period in the previous season. The downward pressure on prices is likely to continue in the coming months against a background of continuing ample inventories among the major exporters and large export availabilities in China. Improving economic conditions, especially in Asia, could produce a faster rise in feed demand than is currently forecast which would contribute to a strengthening of prices.
World coarse grains production is estimated to have fallen about 3 percent in calendar year 1999 to 886 million tonnes, though remaining above the 1994-96 average. Significant declines occurred among some of the major producers including Argentina, China, the EC, India and the United States. Gains among other major producers, such as Brazil and the Russian Federation, were not sufficient to offset these losses. For the 2000/01 season, the overall forecast is very unclear at this time. Although the latest reports from Argentina and southern Africa indicate expanded maize plantings in 2000, there is no firm information concerning planting intentions in some main coarse grain producing regions of Europe. Due to the unwillingness of consumers in some major import markets to accept GMO products, plantings of GMO maize varieties may be reduced next season, in particular in the United States where up to 38 percent of the area was planted to GMO maize in 1999. Whether this will have any impact on average yields and production is uncertain, due to lack of comparable data.
Global coarse grains utilization in 1999/2000 is anticipated to be within the range of the previous three years, 894-898 million tonnes. Utilization for feed could outpace that of the 1998/99 season as higher feed use in North America, South America and in a number of countries of Southeast Asia could more than offset the likely continuing contraction of livestock feeding in several CIS countries, most notably the Russian Federation. In the United States, the demand for coarse grains for industrial products, such as high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) and ethanol, is also expected to continue to be strong. While a significant upswing in the global demand for coarse grains is not likely through the remainder of the 1999/2000 season, improving economic conditions in those countries affected by the financial crisis could lead to the continuing recovery in demand for livestock products and, thus, feed grains in 2000/01.
In spite of the sluggish demand forecast for global coarse grains in 1999/2000, global utilization is likely to exceed production, which would require a slight draw-down in coarse grain stocks to around 142 million tonnes. However, this volume would still be above the average of the previous five years, which was substantially affected by the sharp draw-down in 1995/96. Among the five main exporters, which provide the bulk of the world's available supplies in international markets, ending coarse grain stocks would still be the third highest in ten years. Maize will account for about two-thirds of the world's carryover coarse grain stocks at the end of 1999/2000, while barley will make up another 17 percent. Barley's share of global stocks is expected to be well below its share during the previous five years because of a sharp reduction in EC barley inventories.
For 1999/2000, global trade in coarse grains is forecast to grow by about 3 percent from the previous season to 96 million tonnes, largely due to increased demand from the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation and in some countries of sub-Saharan Africa, in particular Kenya and South Africa. Trade in nearly all types of coarse grains is likely to increase, with maize and barley taking the lead. All of the increase in global coarse grain trade is expected to result from commercial sales, as food aid activity is likely to decline in 1999/2000 because the magnitude of coarse grain food aid shipments to the Russian Federation in 1998/99 is not likely to be repeated this season. In spite of an expected increase in the volume of coarse grains trade, lower international prices compared to the previous season, are expected keep the cost of im-ports from rising, especially among the developing countries. A noteworthy development in 1999/2000 is the sizeable increase in maize exports from China which are expected to exceed 5 million tonnes, up almost 2 million tonnes from the previous season given the large domestic supply and strong demand from neighbouring countries.
|
1994-96 Average |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 | |||
|
Million tonnes | ||||||
|
World total |
873.3 |
904.9 |
911.4 |
886.4 | ||
|
Argentina |
13.5 |
19.7 |
24.2 |
17.5 | ||
|
Brazil |
34.3 |
35.6 |
30.6 |
32.8 | ||
|
Canada |
25.5 |
25.3 |
26.8 |
26.9 | ||
|
China |
131.5 |
119.6 |
149.7 |
143.2 | ||
|
EC |
94.5 |
110.7 |
106.2 |
101.9 | ||
|
India |
31.0 |
30.9 |
31.4 |
28.3 | ||
|
Mexico |
23.7 |
23.9 |
25.5 |
25.3 | ||
|
Poland |
16.0 |
17.2 |
17.6 |
16.6 | ||
|
United States |
253.3 |
260.8 |
271.9 |
263.8 | ||
|
Russian Federation 1 |
37.5 |
42.2 |
22.2 |
25.9 | ||
|
1 Clean weight basis. | ||||||
|
1994/95- 1996/97 Average |
1997/98 |
1998/99 |
1999/00 | ||
|
Million tonnes | |||||
|
World total |
94.0 |
87.2 |
95.3 |
96.0 | |
|
Main exporters |
81.5 |
67.1 |
81.4 |
80.8 | |
|
Argentina |
7.9 |
13.0 |
10.8 |
11.5 | |
|
Australia |
3.6 |
2.9 |
4.9 |
3.3 | |
|
Canada |
4.5 |
3.4 |
2.5 |
3.0 | |
|
EC |
6.8 |
4.0 |
10.4 |
11.0 | |
|
United States |
58.8 |
43.6 |
52.8 |
52.0 | |
|
Others |
12.5 |
20.1 |
13.9 |
15.2 | |
|
China |
2.0 |
7.0 |
3.4 |
5.2 | |
|
Hungary |
0.6 |
2.1 |
2.0 |
1.9 | |
|
Romania |
0.2 |
1.2 |
0.5 |
0.5 | |
|
South Africa |
2.0 |
1.3 |
0.9 |
0.9 | |
|
Turkey |
0.4 |
0.9 |
1.3 |
0.6 | |
|
1 Trade season July/June. | |||||
|
1994/95- 1996/97 Average |
1997/98 |
1998/99 |
1999/00 | |||
|
Million tonnes | ||||||
|
World total |
122.6 |
140.4 |
146.5 |
141.6 | ||
|
Main exporters |
47.0 |
68.9 |
85.0 |
80.3 | ||
|
Argentina |
0.2 |
0.4 |
1.9 |
0.5 | ||
|
Australia |
0.9 |
2.1 |
1.6 |
0.5 | ||
|
Canada |
3.8 |
4.4 |
4.9 |
5.3 | ||
|
EC |
13.2 |
23.9 |
25.2 |
20.7 | ||
|
United States |
28.9 |
38.2 |
51.4 |
53.2 | ||
|
Others |
75.5 |
71.5 |
61.4 |
61.3 | ||
|
China |
30.0 |
17.4 |
21.5 |
23.7 | ||
|
Egypt |
0.3 |
0.3 |
0.4 |
0.4 | ||
|
Japan |
2.1 |
2.4 |
2.2 |
2.1 | ||
|
Mexico |
3.7 |
5.1 |
5.3 |
5.5 | ||
|
Russian Federation |
4.7 |
10.0 |
1.7 |
0.9 | ||
1 At the end of national crop years.
|
1994/95- 1996/97 Average |
1997/98 |
1998/99 |
1999/00 | ||
|
Million tonnes | |||||
|
World total |
92.1 |
89.9 |
92.9 |
96.0 | |
|
Brazil |
1.2 |
1.2 |
1.4 |
1.6 | |
|
China |
9.7 |
6.7 |
7.1 |
7.0 | |
|
Colombia |
1.3 |
1.5 |
1.5 |
1.6 | |
|
EC |
3.8 |
2.4 |
3.5 |
3.1 | |
|
Egypt |
2.7 |
3.0 |
3.6 |
3.3 | |
|
Japan |
20.7 |
21.0 |
20.8 |
20.4 | |
|
Korea, Rep. |
9.2 |
8.0 |
7.6 |
8.3 | |
|
Malaysia |
2.3 |
2.3 |
2.2 |
2.3 | |
|
Mexico |
6.8 |
7.1 |
8.6 |
8.4 | |
|
Saudi Arabia |
5.2 |
6.0 |
6.0 |
6.0 | |
|
1 Trade season July/June. | |||||
|
1994/95 |
1995/96 |
1996/97 |
1997/98 |
1998/99 |
199/00 | ||||||
|
$/ tonne | |||||||||||
|
Maize, US No.2 2 |
104 |
159 |
135 |
112 |
95 |
89 | |||||
|
Maize, Argentina 3 |
110 |
160 |
133 |
109 |
98 |
92 | |||||
|
Sorghum, US No.2 4 |
103 |
156 |
124 |
111 |
92 |
87 | |||||
|
Sources: USDA and Reuters. | |||||||||||
International cassava prices remained relatively depressed in 1999 at levels substantially below the those prevailing in the early 1990s, following the significant drop in 1997. In 1999, the EC import price for cassava chips and pellets fell by a further 5 percent to $102 per tonne. Quotations for cassava pellets in the EC are closely influenced by the domestic prices of grains, especially barley, and the prices of protein-rich meals which supplement cassava to obtain a feed grain substitute compound. A 10 percent decline in soybean meal prices in 1999 enhanced the relative attractiveness of a cassava-soybean meal mix to EC feed users and prevented further erosion in cassava prices. International prices of cassava starches and flours also followed a downward trend for most of the year, dropping to $172 per tonne, considerably below the 1998 level of $281 per tonne. Largely influenced by the developments on the international market, cassava root prices in the major exporting countries have been under downward pressure. In Thailand, they were 42 percent below the level of 1998 and the lowest since 1994, a situation which induced the Government to announce in late 1999 that it would step in to support the market through intervention purchases.
World cassava output in 1999 is estimated to have grown by 3 percent to 168 million tonnes in fresh root equivalent, sustained by increases in the major producing countries in Asia (such as Thailand, Indonesia and China) and in Latin America and the Caribbean (such as Brazil and Paraguay). In both regions, production was boosted by an expansion in plantings and higher yields. By contrast, cassava output declined in several countries in Africa, including Nigeria, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Burundi, Sierra Leone and Uganda, reflecting either drought problems or a disruption of farming activities due to population displacements and civil strife.
World trade in cassava products (dry weight), is estimated to have risen by 22 percent in 1999 to 6 million tonnes, sustained by relatively large export availability in Thailand and a strong import demand by the EC. About 83 percent was traded in the form of chips and pellets for the feed sector and for alcohol production, with the remaining 17 percent as flour and starch for food and industrial transformation. Shipments to the EC, which mainly consist of chips and pellets, amounted to 4.3 million tonnes, 47 percent more than in 1998. However, purchases of cassava products by other importers fell by 15 percent, mainly as a result of smaller purchases by the Republic of Korea and Indonesia. Exports of cassava products from Thailand rose to an estimated 5.2 million tonnes, 30 percent more than in the previous year and close to the level reached in 1997. By contrast, exports of cassava products from China are estimated to have fallen reflecting high domestic demand.
The sharp recovery in the volume of cassava trade boosted exporters' earnings by 20 percent to an estimated $730 million in 1999, notwithstanding the prevailing low international prices. This value still falls considerably short of the export receipts secured in the mid 1990s, which is a matter for concern considering that the sole suppliers of cassava to the international market are developing countries and that the major importers are developed countries.
Early forecasts of global cassava output in 2000 point to a recovery in Africa. An increase is also anticipated for Latin America and the Caribbean, where the interest in promoting the cassava sector has given rise to the establishment of a Consortium, CLAYUCA5, composed of public and private institutions that strive to support research and development of the cassava sector in the region. In Asia, especially in Thailand, low producer prices in 1999 and continued poor price prospects in 2000, might prompt a contraction in cassava cultivation.
Cassava trade in 2000, which relies to some extent on supplies harvested in 1999, could be sustained by large export availability in Thailand. The flat grain prices in the EC and the expected recovery in international oil meal prices are likely to cause cassava pellets prices to remain weak. By contrast, international prices of cassava starch, could recover, although this would depend to a large extent on the durability of the economic recovery in Asia.
|
1994-96 Average |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 Prel. | |||
|
Million tonnes | ||||||
|
World |
164.4 |
164.5 |
162.9 |
168.2 | ||
|
Nigeria |
31.3 |
30.4 |
32.7 |
30.4 | ||
|
Brazil |
24.8 |
24.3 |
19.7 |
20.7 | ||
|
Congo, Dem. Rep. |
18.5 |
17.0 |
17.1 |
16.0 | ||
|
Thailand |
17.3 |
18.1 |
16.4 |
20.3 | ||
|
Indonesia |
16.1 |
15.1 |
14.7 |
15.4 | ||
|
Ghana |
6.6 |
7.0 |
7.2 |
8.4 | ||
|
Tanzania |
6.4 |
5.7 |
6.1 |
6.1 | ||
|
India |
5.8 |
5.9 |
6.1 |
6.2 | ||
|
Mozambique |
4.1 |
5.3 |
5.6 |
5.6 | ||
|
China |
3.5 |
3.7 |
3.4 |
3.6 | ||
|
Paraguay |
2.7 |
3.2 |
3.3 |
3.5 | ||
|
Madagascar |
2.4 |
2.4 |
2.4 |
2.4 | ||
|
Uganda |
2.2 |
2.3 |
3.2 |
3.0 | ||
|
Viet Nam |
2.2 |
2.0 |
1.8 |
1.8 | ||
|
Others |
20.5 |
22.1 |
23.2 |
24.8 | ||
|
1 In fresh root equivalent | ||||||
|
1994-96 Average |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 Prel. | |||||
|
Million tonnes | ||||||||
|
World exports |
6.17 |
6.37 |
4.94 |
6.00 | ||||
|
Thailand |
4.82 |
5.31 |
3.98 |
5.25 | ||||
|
Indonesia |
0.54 |
0.25 |
0.22 |
0.23 | ||||
|
China |
0.47 |
0.37 |
0.30 |
0.10 | ||||
|
Viet Nam |
0.03 |
0.03 |
0.03 |
0.02 | ||||
|
Others |
0.31 |
0.41 |
0.40 |
0.40 | ||||
|
World imports |
6.17 |
6.37 |
4.94 |
6.00 | ||||
|
EC |
4.10 |
3.64 |
2.89 |
4.27 | ||||
|
China |
0.47 |
0.62 |
0.56 |
0.68 | ||||
|
Japan |
0.38 |
0.35 |
0.33 |
0.31 | ||||
|
Korea, Rep. |
0.36 |
0.51 |
0.47 |
0.22 | ||||
|
Indonesia |
0.23 |
0.32 |
0.17 |
0.10 | ||||
|
United States |
0.06 |
0.07 |
0.08 |
0.07 | ||||
|
Others |
0.58 |
0.87 |
0.44 |
0.36 | ||||
|
1
In product weight of chips and pellets (1 tonne of flour equivalent
to | ||||||||
|
1994-96 |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 |
1999 |
1999 |
1999 |
1999 | ||||
|
Jan-Mar |
Apr-Jun |
Jul-Sep |
Oct-Dec | ||||||||
|
$/tonne | |||||||||||
|
Tapioca flour/starch 1 |
300 |
244 |
281 |
172 |
203 |
163 |
160 |
162 | |||
|
Cassava pellets 2 |
158 |
108 |
107 |
102 |
102 |
105 |
100 |
99 | |||
|
Cassava-soybean meal 3 |
170 |
142 |
120 |
112 |
111 |
112 |
111 |
113 | |||
|
Barley 4 |
195 |
161 |
145 |
143 |
150 |
144 |
137 |
141 | |||
|
Maize 5 |
132 |
117 |
102 |
92 |
96 |
94 |
89 |
88 | |||
|
1
Super high grade, fob Bangkok. | |||||||||||
2 Current information on the rice, wheat and coarse grains markets
can be found in FAO's bi-monthly Food Outlook report.
3 This report is based on information available as of January 2000. Current information on the wheat market can be found in FAO's bi-monthly Food Outlook report.
4 This report is based on information available as of January 2000. Current information on the grains market can be found in FAO's bi-monthly Food Outlook report.
5 Consorcio Latinoamericano y del Caribe de Apoyo a la Investigación y Desarrollo de la Yuca
