World Forage Import Market: Competitive Structure and Market Forces
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Theoretical Framework
2.2. Model Construction and Data Sources
3. The Structure of the World Forage Market Trade and Its Evolution
3.1. Structure of International Forage Imports
3.2. Forage Import Prices
3.3. Structure of the International Forage Export Market
4. Empirical Tests and Analysis of Results
4.1. Market Power of Forage-Exporting Countries in the Chinese Forage Market
4.2. Market Power of Forage Exporters in the Japanese Forage Market
4.3. Market Power of Forage Exporters in the Korean Forage Market
4.4. Potential Limitations in This Study
5. Conclusions and Implications
5.1. Conclusions
5.2. Implications
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Science Breakthroughs to Advance Food and Agricultural Research by 2030; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- OECD. Agricultural Outlook 2022–2031; OECD: Paris, France, 2022. [Google Scholar]
- Henchion, M.; Hayes, M.; Mullen, A.M.; Fenelon, M.; Tiwari, B. Future Protein Supply and Demand: Strategies and Factors Influencing a Sustainable Equilibrium. Foods 2017, 6, 53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hawkesworth, S.; Dangour, A.D.; Johnston, D.; Lock, K.; Poole, N.; Rushton, J.; Uauy, R.; Waage, J. Feeding the world healthily: The challenge of measuring the effects of agriculture on health. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2010, 365, 3083–3097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Driehuis, F.; Elferink, S.O. The impact of the quality of silage on animal health and food safety: A review. J. Vet. Q. 2022, 4, 212–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, M. New ideas to effectively solve the problem of food security: Focus on developing the forage industry. China Rural Econ. 2015, 12, 63–74. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Capper, J.L. Is the Grass Always Greener? Comparing the Environmental Impact of Conventional, Natural and Grass-Fed Beef Production Systems. Animals 2012, 2, 127–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, Z.; Qin, F. An Empirical Analysis of the Role of Forage Product Trade on Grassland Quality and Livestock Production in China. Land 2022, 11, 1938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Atkeson, A.; Burstein, A. Pricing-to-Market, Trade Costs, and International Relative Prices. Am. Econ. Rev. 2008, 98, 1998–2031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gonzalez-Garcia, J.; Yang, Y.C. The effect of trade on market power—Evidence from developing economies. J. Int. Trade Econ. Dev. 2022, 31, 811–834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jakubik, A.; Keck, A.; Piermartini, R. Trade Policy Implications of a Changing World: Tariffs and Market Power. Appl. Econ. Lett. 2022, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beshkar, M.; Lee, R. How does import market power matter for trade agreements? J. Int. Econ. 2022, 137, 103580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dai, J.W.; Li, X.; Cai, H.L. Market power, scale economy and productivity: The case of China’s food and tobacco industry. China Agric. Econ. Rev. 2018, 10, 313–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Iveta, R. Market Power in the Czech Banking Sector. J. Compet. 2012, 4, 143–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lerner, A.P. The Concept of Monopoly and the Measurement of Monopoly Power. In Readings in Welfare Economics; Farrell, M.J., Ed.; Macmillan Education UK: London, UK, 1973; pp. 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hall, R.E. The relation between price and marginal cost in the US industry. J. Polit. Econ. 1988, 96, 921–947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beccarello, M. Time series analysis of market power: Evidence from G-7 manufacturing. Int. J. Ind. Organ. 1997, 15, 123–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Knetter, M.M. International Comparisons of Price-to-Market Behavior. Am. Econ. Rev. 1992, 83, 473–486. [Google Scholar]
- Hall, R.E. Using Empirical Marginal Cost to Measure Market Power in the US Economy; No. w25251; National Bureau of Economic Research: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fitzgerald, D.; Haller, S. Pricing-to-Market: Evidence From Plant-Level Prices. Rev. Econ. Stud. 2014, 81, 761–786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Athukorala, P.; Menon, J. Pricing to market behaviour and exchange rate pass-through in Japanese exports. Econ. J. 1994, 104, 271–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adolfson, M. Export price responses to exogenous exchange rate movements. Econ. Lett. 2001, 71, 91–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, X.; Liu, Z.; Yang, D.; Wei, Y.; Gong, N. Can power market reform reduce air pollution?—Evidence from prefecture-level cities in China. PLoS ONE 2023, 18, e0282124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, B.; Marchant, M.A.; Reed, M.R.; Xu, S. Competitive analysis and market power of China’s soybean import market. Int. Food Agribus. Manag. Rev. 2009, 12, 21–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perekhozhuk, O.; Glauben, T.; Grings, M.; Teuber, R. Approaches and methods for the econometric analysis of market power: A survey and empirical comparison. J. Econ. Surv. 2017, 31, 303–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kinnucan, H.W.; Minh, N.D.; Zhang, D.J. Trade diversion and antidumping effectiveness: Insights from a residual demand model. Aust. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 2017, 61, 324–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pakes, A. Empirical tools and competition analysis: Past progress and current problems. Int. J. Ind. Organ. 2017, 53, 241–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, S.-H.; Moon, S. A Risk Map of Markups: Why We Observe Mixed Behaviors of Markups; KIEP Research Paper No. Staff Papers; Chonbuk National University: Jeonju-si, Republic of Korea, 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goldberg, P.K.; Knetter, M.M. Measuring the intensity of competition in export markets. J. Int. Econ. 1999, 47, 27–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, D.E.; Lim, S.S. Market Power Analysis on Shrimp Import from Tropical Asia: The Korean Case. In Proceedings of the Sustainability, Economics, Innovation, Globalisation and Organisational Psychology Conference, Singapore, 1–3 March 2023; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2023; pp. 203–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pall, Z.; Perekhozhuk, O.; Glauben, T.; Prehn, S.; Teuber, R. Residual demand measures of market power of Russian wheat exporters. Agric. Econ. 2014, 45, 381–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jung, J.H.; Sesmero, J.; Siebert, R. A Structural Estimation of Spatial Differentiation and Market Power in Input Procurement. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 2022, 104, 613–644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lv, W.H.; Ye, L.X.; Wang, L. Changes of China’s soybean import market power and influencing factors. Appl. Econ. Lett. 2022, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yan, J.L.; Xue, Y.J.; Quan, C.N.; Wang, B.; Zhang, Y.A. Oligopoly in grain production and consumption: An empirical study on soybean international trade in China. Ekon. Istraz. 2022, 36, 2142818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; de Boer, I.J.; Hou, Y.; van Middelaar, C.E. Manure as waste and food as feed: Environmental challenges on Chinese dairy farms. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2022, 181, 106233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seré, C.; Steinfeld, H.; Groenewold, J. World Livestock Production Systems; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy, 1996. [Google Scholar]
- Wooldridge, J.M. Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Lewbel, A. Constructing instruments for regressions with measurement error when no additional data are available, with an application to patents. Econometrica 1997, 65, 1201–1213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, J.M.; Bentler, P.M. Limited information estimation in binary factor analysis: A review and extension. Comput. Stat. Data Anal. 2013, 57, 392–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chen, Y.; Yang, Z. Foreign entry and market power fluctuations in manufacturing: Competition or monopoly. China Ind. Econ. 2012, 10, 52–64. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Angrist, J.D.; Pischke, J.-S. Mostly Harmless Econometrics; Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
Variable Type | Variable Name | Variable Symbols | Unit | Data Sources |
---|---|---|---|---|
Dependent variable | Imported forage prices | CNY/ton | UN Comtrade database calculations give | |
Core variables | Import trade quantity | ton | UN Comtrade database | |
Demand variable () | GDP of importing countries | 104 CNY/JNY/KRW | World Bank—World Development Indicators | |
Domestic dairy stock in importing countries | head | FAO database | ||
Cost transfer variables () | Consumer price index for export-competing countries | World Bank—World Development Indicators | ||
Real effective exchange rates of export-competing countries | World Bank—World Development Indicators | |||
Other control variables () | US dollar real effective exchange rate | World Bank—World Development Indicators |
FE | IV-2SLS | IV-2SLS | IV-LIML # | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(1) 1997~2020 | (2) 1997~2007 | (3) 2008~2020 | (4) 1997~2020 | (5) 1997~2007 | (6) 2008~2020 | |
−0.214 *** (−8.712) | −0.293 *** (−8.033) | 0.015 (0.449) | −0.276 *** (−10.610) | −0.299 *** (8.260) | 0.153 *** (3.839) | |
1.172 (1.519) | 2.212 (1.523) | −0.168 (−0.248) | 1.921 *** (2.688) | 3.073* (1.897) | −1.295 (−1.544) | |
0.036 (1.301) | 0.289 (1.137) | 0.063 *** (2.875) | 0.063 (1.597) | −0.965 (−0.812) | 0.122 *** (3.339) | |
−0.038 (−1.236) | −0.030 (−0.192) | −0.007 (−0.224) | −0.094 ** (−2.372) | −0.136 (−0.928) | 0.113 ** (2.592) | |
−0.937 ** (−2.193) | −1.176 ** (−2.125) | −0.377 (−0.567) | −0.335 (−0.691) | −1.072 (−1.599) | −0.353 (−0.359) | |
0.0237 ** (2.177) | −0.093 (−1.638) | 0.129 (1.376) | 0.021 * (1.809) | −0.027 (−0.799) | −0.038 *** (−2.605) | |
2.826 * (1.884) | 2.976 ** (2.222) | −3.507 ** (−2.615) | 2.825 ** (2.280) | 2.798 (1.263) | −4.566 *** (−2.605) | |
-cons | −19.372 (−0.869) | −110.715 (−1.150) | 27.050 (1.178) | 51.698 ** (2.415) | ||
n | 102 | 30 | 72 | 87 | 26 | 61 |
adj. | 0.814 | 0.928 | 0.322 | 0.787 | 0.916 | 0.266 |
Kleibergen-Paap rk LM | 5.679 (0.046) | 19.980 (0.000) | 12.052 (0.002) | |||
Kleibergen-Paap rk Wald F | 113.147 (20.02) | 45.832 (20.02) | 6.669 # (19.93) | |||
Hansen J | 0.2018 (0.7106) | 0.0571 (0.8309) | 0.5992 (0.2507) |
FE | IV-2SLS | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(1) 1997~2020 | (2) 1997~2007 | (3) 2008~2020 | (4) 1997~2020 | (5) 1997~2007 | (6) 2008~2020 | |
−0.073 *** | −0.016 | −0.124 *** | −0.139 ** | −0.016 | −0.227 *** | |
(−6.317) | (−0.938) | (−6.163) | (−2.013) | (−0.784) | (−8.104) | |
0.302 | −0.691 ** | 0.277 | 0.324 | −0.730 *** | 0.420 | |
(1.338) | (−2.313) | (0.905) | (1.544) | (−2.684) | (1.442) | |
−0.076 | −0.248 | −0.038 | −0.003 | −0.361 | 0.175 | |
(−0.438) | (−0.664) | (−0.081) | (−0.039) | (−0.791) | (0.397) | |
−0.007 | −0.007 | −0.023 | −0.030 | −0.023 | −0.028 | |
(−0.937) | (−0.403) | (−1.192) | (−1.240) | (−0.869) | (−1.281) | |
−0.065 | 0.020 | 0.102 | −0.042 | 0.037 | 0.528 | |
(−0.225) | (0.056) | (0.181) | (−0.306) | (0.093) | (1.002) | |
0.039 ** | 0.038 | 0.070 * | 0.085 * | 0.089 | 0.079 * | |
(2.528) | (1.030) | (1.885) | (1.788) | (1.541) | (1.868) | |
−1.257 *** | −1.041 ** | −1.476 * | −1.263 *** | −0.451 | −1.129 | |
(−3.414) | (−2.368) | (−1.976) | (−4.440) | (−0.945) | (−1.567) | |
-cons | 5.094 | 34.236 *** | 7.310 | |||
(0.651) | (3.079) | (0.657) | ||||
n | 197 | 85 | 112 | 176 | 71 | 105 |
adj. | 0.613 | 0.407 | 0.400 | 0.652 | 0.535 | 0.449 |
Kleibergen-Paap rk LM | 30.123 (0.000) | 47.705 (0.000) | 18.900 (0.000) | |||
Kleibergen-Paap rk Wald F | 147.054 (19.93) | 85.771 (19.93) | 71.416 (19.93) | |||
Hansen J | 0.140 (0.720) | 0.636 (0.236) | 0.056 (0.832) |
FE | IV-2SLS | IV-LIML # | IV-2SLS | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(1) 1997~2020 | (2) 1997~2007 | (3) 2008~2020 | (4) 1997~2020 | (5) 1997~2007 | (6) 2008~2020 | |
0.008 | −0.018 | 0.039 *** | 0.035 | −0.109 | 0.052 *** | |
(0.811) | (−0.844) | (3.431) | (1.141) | (−1.433) | (3.342) | |
0.161 | 0.262 | 0.280 | −0.1109 | −0.3410 | 0.010 | |
(0.895) | (0.872) | (0.621) | (−0.700) | (−0.504) | (0.024) | |
1.426 * | 2.157 | 1.315 | −0.154 | 2.256 | 0.435 | |
(1.732) | (1.155) | (1.141) | (−0.215) | (0.646) | (0.446) | |
0.007 | −0.019 | −0.036 ** | −0.017 *** | −0.058 | −0.035 ** | |
(0.991) | (−0.884) | (−2.218) | (−2.886) | (−1.125) | (−2.070) | |
0.135 | 0.000 | 0.029 | 0.009 | −0.264 | 0.010 | |
(0.557) | (0.001) | (0.066) | (0.085) | (−0.539) | (0.026) | |
0.019 * | 0.068 ** | −0.062 *** | −0.004 | 0.265 *** | −0.054 * | |
(1.809) | (2.583) | (−2.945) | (−0.403) | (2.615) | (−1.947) | |
−1.579 *** | −2.408 * | −1.024 | −1.053 *** | −1.245 | −0.926 | |
(−3.618) | (−1.924) | (−1.523) | (−2.772) | (−0.524) | (−1.538) | |
-cons | −10.723 | −15.873 | −17.117 | −2.024 | ||
(−1.001) | (−0.890) | (−1.029) | (−0.059) | |||
n | 146 | 61 | 85 | 119 | 51 | 67 |
adj. | 0.523 | 0.457 | 0.348 | 0.676 | 0.201 | 0.241 |
Kleibergen-Paap rk LM | 11.568 (0.003) | 18.157 (0.000) | 48.409 (0.000) | |||
Kleibergen-Paap rk Wald F | 111.814 (19.93) | 12.647 # (19.93) | 116.561 (19.93) | |||
Hansen J | 0.994 (0.195) | 0.876 (0.218) | 0.277 (0.692) |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Wang, W.; Liang, Y.; Ru, Z.; Guo, H.; Zhao, B. World Forage Import Market: Competitive Structure and Market Forces. Agriculture 2023, 13, 1695. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13091695
Wang W, Liang Y, Ru Z, Guo H, Zhao B. World Forage Import Market: Competitive Structure and Market Forces. Agriculture. 2023; 13(9):1695. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13091695
Chicago/Turabian StyleWang, Wenxin, Yaowen Liang, Zhuo Ru, Haojie Guo, and Bingjie Zhao. 2023. "World Forage Import Market: Competitive Structure and Market Forces" Agriculture 13, no. 9: 1695. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13091695
APA StyleWang, W., Liang, Y., Ru, Z., Guo, H., & Zhao, B. (2023). World Forage Import Market: Competitive Structure and Market Forces. Agriculture, 13(9), 1695. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13091695