Pierre Eng_productivity&Comparative Advantage in Rice Agriculture
Comparative Analysis of Agriculture in the South Caucasus
description
Transcript of Comparative Analysis of Agriculture in the South Caucasus
![Page 1: Comparative Analysis of Agriculture in the South Caucasus](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56813afa550346895da387bf/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Comparative Analysis of Agriculture in the South Caucasus
4th July 2013Dr. George Welton
![Page 2: Comparative Analysis of Agriculture in the South Caucasus](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56813afa550346895da387bf/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
The importance of agriculture in the Caucasus
employment poverty
growth security
![Page 3: Comparative Analysis of Agriculture in the South Caucasus](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56813afa550346895da387bf/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Employment/Poverty• Commonalities
– Most rural families are ‘employed’ in this way– But massively under-employed
• Rural communities (particularly isolated communities) are generally poorer
• Median income for agricultural ‘employed’ is low relative to other sectors
Therefore• In urban communities the problem is unemployment• In rural communities the problem is under-
employment and low productivity
![Page 4: Comparative Analysis of Agriculture in the South Caucasus](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56813afa550346895da387bf/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Georgia has strong basics• High rainfall – more than 2x Azerbaijan – almost 4x Armenia
• Large number of microclimates for high value goods– Nuts– Citrus
• Low labour costs• Land prices• Potential sources of low-price energy (hydro and
thermal)
![Page 5: Comparative Analysis of Agriculture in the South Caucasus](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56813afa550346895da387bf/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
But Georgia has low productivity
Wheat Maize Potatoes Tomatoes
Georgia 1 1.4 11 8.4
Armenia 2.1 4.7 17 38.7
Azerbaijan 1.9 4.5 14.5 17
Kenya 3.2 1.6 2.9 29.2
Brazil 2.8 4.4 25.3 60.7
France 7 8.9 39.8 98.3
Turkey 2.4 7.3 32.3 33.1
Productivity per hectare in various countries
![Page 6: Comparative Analysis of Agriculture in the South Caucasus](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56813afa550346895da387bf/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
And a bad comparative decline• Georgia has seen 11% decline per year on
average 1990-2000– 0.6% recovery per year (2000-2010)– Overall 20% growth in value(1996-2010)
• Both Armenia and Azerbaijan have seen far higher growth – Armenia showing particularly high growth in beef
and vegetables (4-6% for beef, 7-10% vegetables per year 2000-2010 volume growth)
– Azerbaijan seeing dramatic increase in beef and in grain production (7-10% for beef per year 2000-2010, 7-8% for grain 1995-2005 volume growth)
![Page 7: Comparative Analysis of Agriculture in the South Caucasus](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56813afa550346895da387bf/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Slow recovery – the role of the state?• Shevardnadze Government– Failed state– Collapse in infrastructure
• UNM Government– Lack of attention and a rural focus– The problems of libertarianism• Animal disease• Irrigation• Education
– The problems of state competition
![Page 8: Comparative Analysis of Agriculture in the South Caucasus](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56813afa550346895da387bf/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
An example - irrigation can be fixed• Armenia and Azerbaijan have seen significant
improvements
• Georgia improvements less impressive. What is needed:– Very local management– Commitment to reinvest revenues– Remove confusion of energy
production/agriculture
![Page 9: Comparative Analysis of Agriculture in the South Caucasus](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56813afa550346895da387bf/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
The difference is not just spending• Georgia – at its low point in 2010, Ministry of
agriculture spending represented 0.5% of total spending
• Azerbaijan hard to estimate but huge categories of inputs are massively subsidized. This has led to distortions.
• Armenian MoAg spending only around 1% of total. However:– More market driven– Focused on education and rural advise– Consistent
![Page 10: Comparative Analysis of Agriculture in the South Caucasus](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56813afa550346895da387bf/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Market Access– Internal – Georgia is clearly better• Easier business environment (E0DB-
Georgia – 9, Armenia – 32, Azerbaijan - 67)• Armenia has a few big producers offering
forward pricing– External Access• Armenia and Azerbaijan – Access to Russia• Georgia – unutilized access to West
– External competition• Georgia has unprotected markets
![Page 11: Comparative Analysis of Agriculture in the South Caucasus](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56813afa550346895da387bf/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Land ownership and useage• The problem is NOT size of land-plots• But privatisation and good land-purchasing
system is useful for encouraging FDI• All countries have issues with land-ownership• Problems in Georgia’s system– GPS system is unlikely to lead to correction of
ownership issues without central input– Ownership issues hurdle to large and small
farmers – though biggest challenge FDI
![Page 12: Comparative Analysis of Agriculture in the South Caucasus](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56813afa550346895da387bf/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Agricultural support servicesFor crops: Machinerry, seed, fertiliser, pesticides, orrigation
For animals: Veterinary, genetics, feed
For all: Cost and availability of finance
Lessons learned from the region•Government financing is common•Financing mechanism is key – needs to work through markets•One needs to be wary of causing distortion - Azerbaijan•In many areas – subsidy of support services is no use without education
![Page 13: Comparative Analysis of Agriculture in the South Caucasus](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56813afa550346895da387bf/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Sector dynamicsBeef and Lamb • Imports of beef went up until 2008
• Exports of live animals (beef and lamb) have gone up dramatically and local production of beef went down • Local production has gone down (as they are exported as live animals)
![Page 14: Comparative Analysis of Agriculture in the South Caucasus](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56813afa550346895da387bf/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Dairy• Driving force of farming sector• Most dairy consumed as cheese. All three
countries in the region have high self-sufficiency in own cheese production
But• Very low milk yield• Inefficient use of time in home production
![Page 15: Comparative Analysis of Agriculture in the South Caucasus](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56813afa550346895da387bf/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Meat and dairy problems
- Animal disease- Bad genetics - Animal feed- Poor education
Missed opportunity- Mountain grazing is under-utilised – could be used to
raise more calves- Low use of animal feed makes lowland pasture a
limiting factor on growth- Demand for ‘fresh cheese’ in the winter – suggests
opportunity for shift in milk production
![Page 16: Comparative Analysis of Agriculture in the South Caucasus](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56813afa550346895da387bf/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Trends - CropsPotatoes Nuts
Watermelons
Increase
Potatoes Nuts Watermelons
Decrease
![Page 17: Comparative Analysis of Agriculture in the South Caucasus](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56813afa550346895da387bf/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Exports Growth Areas
Nuts Wine/Spirits
Live animals
Fresh fruit and vegetables
InternationalCommodity
Regional Commodity
![Page 18: Comparative Analysis of Agriculture in the South Caucasus](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56813afa550346895da387bf/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Two Agricultures. Two ProblemsSmall Farmers Commercial Farmers
Irrigation Land ownership
Chronic disease leads to low productivity
Disease is big risk for investment
Availability of capital Cost of capital
Availability of quality inputs
High level management and agronomists
Basic knowledge Complex social environment
![Page 19: Comparative Analysis of Agriculture in the South Caucasus](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56813afa550346895da387bf/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Conclusions for Georgia•Significant opportunities exist. Highest demand depends upon:• Unusual climate (nuts and some citrus)• Geography (live animals and fresh fruit and vegetables)• Cultural product (wine)
•Demand/opportunity also exists in supply chain• Sustainability requires limited government intervention
General•Need to ensure that policies are consistent and market oriented•Government should first focus on structural problems• Education• Irrigation• Animal health• Land-ownership• Cooperatives
![Page 20: Comparative Analysis of Agriculture in the South Caucasus](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56813afa550346895da387bf/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Thank you