Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Competitiveness of Global Agriculture pp 99–129Cite as

The Competitiveness of Global Agriculture

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

This chapter provides an overview of the competitiveness of different nations in global agriculture and food trade. The chapter starts with a presentation of empirical evidence on the topic together with the methodology. This is followed by a systematical country and country group level analysis of competitiveness and its long run stability. The chapter clearly identifies the countries that are competitive, and the different agricultural product groups in the world market. The chapter analyses three policy regimes (1991–1998, 1999–2006, 2007–2014) representing an early period of post-structural adjustment and disintegration of the Soviet Union, a middle period of increased democracy, market orientation, and globalization, and the last period of post food price crisis. The aim of this chapter is to understand the factors that influence changes in global food security patterns. Results suggest that countries that are rich net food exporters have the most competitive positions in agri-food markets across the world, however country level analysis shows large variations. On the whole, there is a trend for changing specialization patterns in agri-food trade across the world.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Akmal N, Akhtar W, Shah H, Niazi MA, Saleem T (2014) The structure and competitiveness of Pakistan’s basmati rice exports. Asian J Agric Rural Dev 4(4):304–312

    Google Scholar 

  • Astaneh HK, Yaghoubi M, Kalateharabi V (2014) Determining revealed comparative advantage and target markets for Iran’s stone fruits. J Agric Sci Technol 16:253–264

    Google Scholar 

  • Balassa B (1965) Trade liberalization and revealed comparative advantage. Manch Sch 33:99–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Béguin C, Hullinger B (2008) The BACON-EEM algorithm for multivariate outlier detection in incomplete survey data. Surv Methodol 34(1):91–103

    Google Scholar 

  • Beyene HG (2014a) Trade integration and revealed comparative advantages of Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asian merchandize export. Foreign Trade Rev 49(2):163–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beyene HG (2014b) Trade integration and revealed comparative advantages of Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America & Caribbean merchandize export. Int Trade J 28(5):411–441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bojnec Š, Fertő I (2008) European enlargement and agro-food trade. Can J Agric Econ 56(4):563–579

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bojnec Š, Fertő I (2015) Agri-food export competitiveness in European Union countries. J Common Mark Stud 3:476–492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chingarande A, Mzumara M, Karambakuwa R (2013) Comparative advantage and economic performance of East African Community (EAC) member states. J Econ 4(1):39–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalum B, Laursen K, Villumsen G (1998) “Structural change in OECD export specialisation patterns: de-specialisation and ‘stickiness’. Int Rev Appl Econ 2:423–443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Disdier A-C, Emlinger C, Fouré J (2015) Atlantic versus Pacific agreement in agri-food sectors: does the winner take it all? Selected Paper prepared for presentation at the 2015 Agricultural & Applied Economics Association and Western Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA, July 26–28

    Google Scholar 

  • El-Habba MS, Al-Mulhim F (2013) The competitiveness of the Saudi Arabian date palm: an analytical study. Afr J Agric Res 8:5260–5267

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO (2003) Trade reforms and food security – conceptualizing the linkages. FAO, Rome, p 315

    Google Scholar 

  • Fertő I (2008) The evolution of agri-food trade patterns in Central European countries. Post-Communist Econ 20(1):1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoen AR, Oosterhaven J (2006) On the measurement of comparative advantage. Ann Reg Sci 40(3):677–691

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korinek J, Melatos M (2009) Trade impacts of selected regional trade agreements in agriculture. OECD Trade Policy Working Papers, No. 87, OECD Publishing, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuldilok KS, Dawson PJ, Lingary J (2013) The export competitiveness of the tuna industry in Thailand. Br Food J 3:328–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lafay G (1992) The measurement of revealed comparative advantages. In: Dagenais MG, Muet PA (eds) International trade modelling. Chapman & Hill, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Linehan V, Thorpe S, Andrews N, Kim Y, Beaini F (2012) Food demand to 2050. Opportunities for Australian Agriculture. Australian Government, Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (ABARES). Paper presented at the 42nd ABARES Outlook conference 6–7 March 2012, Canberra, ACT

    Google Scholar 

  • Málaga JE, Williams GW (2006) Mexican agricultural and food export competitiveness. TAMRC International Market Research Report No. IM-01-06

    Google Scholar 

  • McLean S, Pantin M, Skerrette N (2014) Regional integration in the Caribbean. The role of trade agreements and structural transformation. ECLAC Studies and Perspectives Series no. 37

    Google Scholar 

  • Ndayitwayeko WM, Odhiambo MO, Korir M, Nyangweso PM, Chepng’Eno W (2014) Comparative advantage of the eastern and central Africa in the coffee export sector: the case of Burundi. Afr Crop Sci J 22(4):987–995

    Google Scholar 

  • Qineti A, Rajcaniova M, Matejkova E (2009) The competitiveness and comparative advantage of the Slovak and the EU agri-food trade with Russia and Ukraine. Agric Econ (Czech) 8:375–383

    Google Scholar 

  • Sahinli MA (2013) Comparative advantage of agriculture sector between Turkey and European Union. Afr J Agric Res 10:884–895

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarker R, Ratnasena S (2014) Revealed comparative advantage and half-a-century competitiveness of Canadian agriculture: a case study of wheat, beef, and pork sectors. Can J Agric Econ 62(4):519–554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Serin V, Civan A (2008) Revealed comparative advantage and competitiveness: a case study for Turkey towards the EU. J Econ Soc Res 10:25–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Serrano R, Pinilla V (2014) Changes in the structure of world trade in the agri-food industry: the impact of the home market effect and regional liberalization from a long-term perspective, 1963–2010. Agribusiness 30(2):165–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sparling D, Thimpson S (2011) Competitiveness of the Canadian agri-food sector. The Canadian Agri-Food Policy Institute, Ottawa

    Google Scholar 

  • Török A, Jámbor A (2013) Agri-food trade of the new member states since EU accession. Agric Econ (Czech) 3:101–112

    Google Scholar 

  • Vollrath TL (1991) A theoretical evaluation of alternative trade intensity measures of revealed comparative advantage. Weltwirtschaftliches Arch 130(2):265–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Widodo T (2009) Comparative advantage: theory, empirical measures and case studies. Rev Econ Bus Stud 4(2):57–82

    Google Scholar 

  • Yu R, Cai J, Leung PS (2009) The normalized revealed comparative advantage index. Ann Reg Sci 43(1):267–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Corvinus University of Budapest, Budapest, Hungary

    Attila Jambor

  2. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC, USA

    Suresh Babu

Authors
  1. Attila Jambor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Suresh Babu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Appendix 6.1: Means of Balassa Indices for Global Agricultural and Food Trade by Country, 1991–2014

Appendix 6.1: Means of Balassa Indices for Global Agricultural and Food Trade by Country, 1991–2014

 

1991–1998

1999–2006

2007–2014

Afghanistan

n.a.

n.a.

1.31

Albania

0.56

0.50

0.46

Algeria

0.08

0.08

0.07

Andorra

0.12

0.40

1.09

Anguila

n.a.

0.15

0.16

Antigua and Barbuda

n.a.

0.14

0.26

Argentina

1.35

1.43

1.65

Armenia

0.28

0.42

0.55

Aruba

n.a.

1.07

0.54

Australia

1.32

1.45

1.08

Austria

0.41

0.54

0.74

Azerbaijan

0.44

0.35

0.32

Bahamas

0.15

0.10

0.23

Bahrain

n.a.

0.07

0.35

Bangladesh

0.66

0.33

0.44

Barbados

0.67

0.44

0.36

Belarus

0.98

0.67

0.66

Belgium

n.a.

1.17

1.22

Belize

0.32

0.23

0.38

Benin

0.29

0.35

0.38

Bermuda

0.88

n.a.

0.24

Bhutan

0.81

0.46

0.25

Bolivia

0.41

0.34

0.41

Bosnia and Herzegovina

n.a.

0.57

0.60

Botswana

n.a.

0.21

0.29

Brazil

0.76

0.94

0.97

Brunei

0.01

0.01

0.05

Bulgaria

1.25

0.96

1.01

Burkina Faso

0.39

0.57

0.54

Burundi

0.31

0.25

0.36

Cambodia

n.a.

0.25

0.31

Cameroon

0.34

0.25

0.48

Canada

0.92

1.05

1.09

Cape Verde

0.17

0.12

0.29

Central African Republic

0.22

0.28

0.28

Chile

1.40

1.47

1.29

China

1.61

1.06

0.62

Colombia

0.63

0.73

0.62

Comoros

0.05

0.03

0.64

Congo

0.08

n.a.

0.16

Cook Islands

n.a.

0.91

0.10

Costa Rica

1.05

1.06

1.13

Cote d’Ivoire

0.42

0.49

0.60

Croatia

1.03

0.86

0.96

Cuba

n.a.

0.31

n.a.

Cyprus

0.85

0.89

0.68

Czech Republic

0.74

0.50

0.52

Denmark

1.68

1.70

1.74

Dominica

0.54

0.36

0.40

Dominican Republic

1.41

0.69

0.77

East Timor

n.a.

0.03

0.12

Ecuador

0.72

0.80

0.89

Egypt

1.02

0.88

1.36

El Salvador

0.81

0.78

0.75

Estonia

1.01

0.87

0.97

Ethiopia

0.41

0.72

0.77

Faeroe Islands

0.24

0.23

0.30

Fiji

n.a.

0.89

0.92

Finland

0.28

0.25

0.34

France

1.17

1.24

1.39

French Polynesia

0.11

0.23

0.34

Gabon

0.03

0.07

0.06

Gambia

0.53

0.39

0.40

Georgia

0.83

0.55

0.48

Germany

0.57

0.56

0.62

Ghana

0.41

0.59

0.45

Greece

1.15

1.21

1.31

Greenland

0.15

0.13

0.11

Grenada

0.42

0.27

0.25

Guatemala

1.13

1.32

1.31

Guinea

0.30

0.28

0.73

Guinea-Bissau

n.a.

0.07

n.a.

Guyana

0.63

0.60

0.50

Honduras

0.80

0.84

0.93

Hungary

1.76

0.96

0.88

Iceland

0.46

0.50

0.43

India

1.18

1.19

1.10

Indonesia

0.96

1.08

1.14

Iran

0.72

0.56

0.60

Ireland

0.92

0.72

0.91

Israel

0.79

0.52

0.58

Italy

0.80

0.91

1.06

Jamaica

0.74

0.53

0.80

Japan

0.09

0.10

0.13

Jordan

0.66

0.70

0.69

Kazakhstan

1.10

0.39

0.17

Kenya

0.89

1.09

1.12

Kiribati

0.00

0.04

0.04

Korea

0.40

0.27

0.31

Kuwait

n.a.

0.03

0.26

Kyrgyz Republic

3.50

0.79

0.93

Latvia

0.86

0.68

1.27

Lebanon

1.24

1.20

1.16

Lesotho

n.a.

0.13

0.72

Lithuania

1.33

0.94

1.55

Luxembourg

n.a.

0.49

0.58

Macao

0.20

0.04

0.03

Macedonia

0.95

0.81

0.84

Madagascar

0.88

0.80

0.77

Malawi

1.16

0.41

0.63

Malaysia

0.63

0.56

0.66

Maldives

0.07

0.05

0.07

Mali

0.52

0.43

0.39

Malta

0.16

0.14

0.18

Mauritania

n.a.

0.07

0.22

Mauritius

0.21

0.27

0.36

Mayotte

n.a.

0.16

0.17

Mexico

0.73

0.64

0.72

Moldova

1.35

1.06

1.00

Mongolia

0.35

0.29

0.15

Montenegro

n.a.

0.57

0.51

Montserrat

n.a.

0.00

0.10

Morocco

1.02

0.96

0.98

Mozambique

1.11

0.47

0.46

Namibia

n.a.

0.85

0.77

Nepal

0.70

0.61

0.64

Netherlands

2.11

1.77

2.01

New Caledonia

n.a.

0.16

0.12

New Zealand

1.34

1.40

1.51

Nicaragua

0.86

0.90

0.91

Niger

0.33

0.48

0.39

Nigeria

0.14

0.06

0.38

Norway

0.49

0.42

0.44

Oman

0.38

0.35

0.27

Pakistan

n.a.

0.86

1.10

Palestine

n.a.

n.a.

1.18

Panama

0.61

0.85

0.61

Papua New Guinea

0.33

0.33

0.25

Paraguay

0.65

0.80

0.67

Peru

0.64

0.86

0.81

Philippines

0.52

0.51

0.63

Poland

1.47

1.20

1.28

Portugal

0.71

0.86

1.29

Qatar

n.a.

0.04

0.16

Romania

0.70

0.42

0.49

Russian Federation

0.23

0.20

0.35

Rwanda

0.18

0.21

0.59

Samoa

n.a.

0.54

0.39

Sao Tome and Principe

n.a.

0.20

0.21

Saudi Arabia

0.15

0.16

0.30

Senegal

0.54

0.63

0.93

Serbia

1.32

1.39

1.44

Seychelles

0.07

0.07

0.10

Singapore

0.63

0.39

0.30

Slovakia

1.11

0.92

0.92

Slovenia

0.76

0.39

0.37

South Africa

0.97

1.12

1.17

Spain

1.68

1.95

2.12

Sri Lanka

0.72

0.62

0.83

Saint Kitts and Nevis

0.24

0.16

0.11

St Lucia

0.33

0.33

0.54

St Vincent

0.59

0.28

0.26

Suriname

0.49

0.24

0.56

Swaziland

n.a.

0.62

0.41

Sweden

0.34

0.48

0.63

Switzerland

0.25

0.24

0.22

Syrian Arab Republic

n.a.

1.64

1.80

Tanzania

0.88

1.14

0.99

Thailand

1.02

1.04

0.97

Togo

0.34

0.80

0.71

Tonga

n.a.

0.15

0.19

Trinidad and Tobago

0.70

0.37

0.28

Tunisia

0.71

0.69

0.70

Turkey

1.34

1.09

1.13

Uganda

0.77

0.72

0.93

Ukraine

0.81

0.67

0.87

United Arab Emirates

0.43

0.96

0.85

United Kingdom

0.66

0.63

0.70

USA

0.95

1.03

1.13

Uruguay

1.20

1.10

1.11

Vanuatu

2.77

0.70

0.32

Venezuela

0.33

0.20

0.03

Vietnam

n.a.

1.29

0.96

Yemen

n.a.

0.60

0.72

Zambia

0.49

0.44

0.34

Zimbabwe

1.00

0.86

0.44

  1. Source: Own composition based on World Bank (2016) data

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Jambor, A., Babu, S. (2016). The Competitiveness of Global Agriculture. In: Competitiveness of Global Agriculture. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44876-3_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation