martes 28 de julio de 2009

Impact of the Agriculture and Greenhouse gas Cap-and-Trade

The latest Policy Issues article, “Agriculture and Greenhouse Gas Cap-and-Trade” is now available online. You can read it, free of charge through AgFoodTTank, on the AAEA Web site.
A federal cap-and-trade system is increasingly likely in the near future. Questions about its impacts on agriculture, especially its role as a provider of carbon offsets, are yet to be settled. This article explores issues that will determine the limits and income potential for agriculture in providing those offsets. Policy makers are currently struggling with these issues as they attempt to reach agreement on pending legislation.

Policy Issues is a collection of short analyses/discussions focusing on timely policy issues targeted for those in public and private sector decision-making roles who have a stake in the national issues addressed. It is part of AAEA’s Outreach effort, which also includes Choices Magazine. You can find the latest issue of Choices, which discusses the future of agriculture in a turbulent economy, also free of charge through Agri Food Think Tank, on the Choices Web site.
by Beverely Solls for www.agfood.net

jueves 23 de julio de 2009

Is China recession proof?

In this interview of the McKinsey Global Institute we hear the opinion of Chinese economies on how China is acting through the crisis. People interviewed are members of the McKinsey Council on China Business Economists. The forecasts of GDP growth are similar to the ones predicted in this blog Agri Food Think Tank by October of last year despite Global Crisis.

Janamitra Devan: What is your view about China’s GDP in 2009?
David Li: My view is very, very simple. That for 2009, the Chinese GDP most likely will grow between 8 and 9 percent. And most likely it will move toward 9 percent rather than 8 percent. The reason’s very simple. Two things are going up to compensate for the diminishing export. One thing is consumption: the retail [sector] has been growing very, very fast in China. The other thing is investment. Lots of investment projects are being started right now as we speak. So, these two things are growing very fast, compensating for lost exports.
Tang Min: I’m less optimistic than David. My projections are 7 to 8 [percent].
Chi Wei: Well, I’m optimistic about the Chinese economy. But I’ll say 7 to 8 percent is about the range. But in the long term, China is going to grow at a considerable rate.
Xiao Geng: I think 7 percent would be great. Eight percent would be quite difficult. I’m a little concerned about the export sector and also how fast those investment projects can create value-added employment, wages, and profit.
Janamitra Devan: Is China in a recession? And if so, how do you define “recession” for a country like China?
David Li: I wouldn’t say “recession.” I would characterize it as an expanded time-out [of the growth of the economy]. The Chinese urbanization rate has been slower than the industrialization rate. And right now, China is making up for its slow pace of urbanization. And urbanization is the major engine for the economy of the world. As we speak, in Beijing, there are three or four subway lines being built underground. We don’t see them; they are very busy working on this. And Beijing is not exceptional. There are many, many other cities in which these [types of] things are happening.
Also, China is in a stage where households are massively, aggressively upgrading their consumption. We are not talking about their first watches. We’re not talking about their first microwaves. We’re talking about their first automobiles—the first automobiles in their lifetime. And the first commercially developed apartments.
In this kind of environment, it’s very difficult to expect the Chinese economy to grow very slowly. Anything below 8 percent would be, by Chinese standard, considered a recession.
Tang Min: By international standards, 7, 8 percent, that’s excellent—the best—performance for many, many countries. But standards in China for the past 30 years have averaged 9.7, 9.8 percent. So a 7 to 8 percent [growth in GDP], from a Chinese point of view, is a little bit disappointing.
Janamitra Devan: What is wrong or right about China’s growth? Or rather, what is wrong or right about China’s composition of GDP?
David Li: What is appropriate and what is not appropriate depends on the time horizon. In the long run, the current structure of GDP definitely is crazy, right? It’s inappropriate, because we are having only about 50 percent—actually, 49.5 percent—of GDP each year absorbed by consumption. That’s too low a ratio of consumption. That’s the long-term point of view.
However, facing the impact of the financial crisis, there’s no other choice but to increase the proportion of investment. If consumption cannot be boosted in the short run, the only answer is investment. Investment typically, in the past few years, accounted for 45 percent of GDP. This year, I would predict that investment would even go up as high as 60 percent of GDP.
So, that’s the only thing to do, right? Because otherwise, there’s no way to provide enough jobs. If you cannot provide enough jobs for the young kids and the college graduates, they are going to complain. The social pressure will be so high. So, to me 8 percent is the minimum [needed] to provide enough jobs.
Tang Min: I think China needs a major structural change. And that structural change, mainly, is domestic demand and more job creation and less dependence on the global market. And this pattern can only be achieved if the government invests more in the service sector, if the policy is more favorable to the service sector—to small and medium-size enterprises, to private-sector development.
David Li: In the short run, there are very few options but to keep a reasonably fast pace of GDP growth through heavy investments. In the long run, after the financial crisis, sure, we definitely will work hard, improving the structure of the economy.
Chi Wei: I’m concerned about this huge investment infrastructure in such a short period of time. Is there any way you can guarantee that this investment will be effective? Once you put the railway there or highway there, if it’s not going to be productive, it’s redundant. It’s a waste of resources at the expense of the high growth.
Xiao Geng: I think infrastructure investment actually is very useful and important. But the government also needs reform to help increase productivity in the service sector. And I don’t think the government has done enough.They already have a plan to build the subway, build the highway and railway. So, you just speed up those processes. But we have to think about who’s going to use them and how to encourage the service sector’s development, tax reform—those kind of second-wave reforms—to encourage a more productive market.

For the complete article go to source of McKinsey clicking

viernes 3 de julio de 2009

Heavy bet of Brazilian government to increase Ag production

President Lula launched last week one of the most ambitious plans ever in Brazilian history to increase agricultural production. Brazilian farmers have experienced severe financial stress during last campaign.
With this new Plan, Lula Da Silva increases 37% the agricultural budget and increases 20% the loans with fixed rates for farmers. Under this Plan called Plan Agrícola y Ganadero 2009-2010 Brazil will invest more than u$s53.217 million in the agriculture and livestock sector.
The 37% increase vs. last year budget is what Lula call an incentive measure to be prepared for the new born of US and Europe after financial crisis. ¨Imagine a huge bear inside a cold cavern that when the winter ends will start demanding more and more food¨Lula said comparing these regions with this animal.
The plan also increases the minimum prices paid to farmers in different products. Rice minimum price will increase a 20%; milk, 15%; soybean, 10%; and corn 6 %.
Agriculture Minister Mr. Stephanes also announced the creation of a new government fund against climatic risks. Lula is also looking to include 70 million hectares of the Amazonas to produce more export food.
A Morgan Stanley Research disclosed during past February concluded that there were more than 70% of Brazilian farmers lacking capital for full 2009-2010 planting costs.

Source AgriFood Think Tank

miércoles 1 de julio de 2009

CAIDA DE EXPORTACIONES AGRICOLAS Y SU...


CAIDA DE EXPORTACIONES AGRICOLAS Y SU IMPACTO EN LAS CUENTAS FISCALES*


La fragilidad de las cuentas fiscales una vez mas hace que el análisis de la caída en las exportaciones agrícolas sea de suma importancia para saber cómo será la situación financiera del estado en lo que queda de 2009 y lo que puede pasar en 2010.



1. Breve descripción de la sensible situación fiscal 2009



El Gobierno llega a las elecciones de fin de junio con cuentas fiscales deterioradas. El superávit primario (antes de pagos de deuda) cae muy fuerte (60%) ya que el gasto sube 29% ($M 22800) y los ingresos apenas 7% ($M 9000). El aumento en los ingresos se explica en gran parte por la reforma de las AFJP. Conclusión, esperamos que para el primer semestre, el superávit primario caiga a menos de la mitad de 2008 ($M32000 vs $M11000 aproximadamente).



Con este escenario y pagos de deuda a cubrir por $M14000, el gobierno cierra la caja en pesos con un faltante de aproximadamente $M5000 que cubriría buscando recursos de otros organismos nacionales y saldos acumulados.



El problema sería el cierre de las mismas cuentas en el segundo semestre de 2009. Creemos que con estos niveles de incremento de gastos (y de no mediar aumentos en los subsidios que en el primer semestre se mantuvieron estables), el superávit primario sería de tan solo $M2500 con una balanza comercial muy ajustada como veremos a continuación. Con este saldo de $M2500 deberían afrontarse vencimientos de deuda por casi $M13500 (préstamos garantizados, recompras de la ANSES) que dejarían al gobierno con una necesidad financiera de $M11000 para cerrar el año.



Sumado a esto en el segundo semestre existen vencimientos de deuda en dólares por USD5500. Al no quedar excedentes de caja y estar pagando el gobierno con Bonos como el Boden 2012 tasas de 40% para financiarse (vs Brasil Global 2019 a solo 5%, Chile Global 2013 a 3% y Colombia Global 2019 a 6%) solo le quedaría recurrir a las reservas (prohibido en estas cantidades por la Carta Orgánica del Central), o a organismos internacionales. Como veremos mas adelante, estimamos la caída en la recaudación por retenciones al complejo granario cercana a los USD5000 millones para el año 2009 por la menor producción agrícola.


En el frente cambiario la situación no es mejor. El superávit cae significativamente solo ayudado por la caída en las importaciones . Esta caída durante el primer trimestre (-36%) ha sido la mayor de la región y una de las mayores del mundo. Aunque esto ayuda al superávit, es muy difícil que el PBI pueda recuperar niveles de crecimiento anteriores (3 a 6%) con estos ratios de importación.



2. Dramática caída en las exportaciones agrícolas y su impacto


Las consecuencias del conflicto con el agro para el gobierno fueron sustantivas y públicas desde el punto de vista institucional (pérdida de su vicepresidente, pérdida de apoyo de gobernadores y senadores provinciales, renuncia de ministro de economía, caída de imagen a nivel nacional en las grandes ciudades y en el interior, entre otras). A esto se suma ahora el deterioro en la balanza comercial que se explica en gran parte por la caída en las exportaciones agrícolas.


La política que denominamos anti-exportadora para el complejo agroindustrial, sumada a uno de las peores condiciones climáticas de las últimas décadas (en algunas zonas las peores de los últimos 100 años), han hecho caer dramáticamente la producción de productos agropecuarios que son la principal fuente de ingresos de divisas en Argentina.


Para la nota completa clickear. For the complete article Click

Por el Ing. José Gobbée, Master in Agricultural Economics de Cornell University. Director de GOAGRO (www.goagro.com.ar) y miembro de AGRI FOOD THINK TANK (www.agfood.net)



Publicado en la Revista de Julio del (IAEF) Instituto Argentino de Ejecutivos de Finanzas. Derechos reservados