تأثیر متغیرهای حکمرانی کشاورزی بر بازار گوشت دام و طیور در ایران

نوع مقاله : مقالات پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 فردوسی مشهد

2 دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد

چکیده

حکمرانی خوب برای کشاورزی به­معنی فراهم آوردن خدمات بهتر با مشارکت دولت، جامعه مدنی و بخش خصوصی برای کشاورزان است. حکمرانی کشاورزی شامل نهادهایی است که در آن کشاورزان در مورد منافع خود صحبت می­کنند، حقوق قانونی خود را اعمال می­کنند، تعهدات خود را برآورده می­کنند و در زمان اختلاف میان آن­ها میانجی­گری می­شود. در این تحقیق، تأثیر ضریب تغییر متغیرهای منتخب حکمرانی کشاورزی (دامداری) در برنامه­های توسعه کشور بر بازار گوشت با استفاده از مدل جابجایی تعادل 4(EDM) مورد بررسی قرار گرفت. عوامل قیمت و مقدار برای مرغ، گاو و گوسفند و هم­چنین مازاد عرضه­کننده تحت سناریوهای مختلف در برنامه پنجم و ششم توسعه مورد بررسی قرار گرفت. نتایج نشان داد که عوامل اشتغال کشاورزی و شرکت­های تعاونی بیشترین اهمیت را در حوزه سیاسی، اجتماعی و محیطی دارند و عوامل افزایش تولید و سرمایه­گذاری در حوزه اقتصادی بیشترین رتبه و اهمیت را دارند. مطابق با یافته­های پژوهش، از جمله توصیه­های سیاستی این است که حکمرانی خوب باید منافع کشاورزی را در حوزه‌های مختلف از طریق اجماع و مشارکت عمومی با کشاورزان تامین کند. دست­یابی به توافق جامع نیازمند نمایندگان منتخب، متخصصان متفکر و کشاورزان نوآور با دیدگاه وسیع و بلندمدت در زمینه حکمرانی خوب و داشتن درک درست از رشد و توسعه کشاورزی است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The Effects of Agricultural Governance Variables on Iran’s Livestock and Meat Market

نویسنده [English]

  • M.R. Kohansal 2
چکیده [English]

Introduction: Governance is the way rules, norms and actions are structured, sustained, regulated and held accountable in a society. Works by the World Bank and other multilateral development banks on good governance addresses economic institutions and public sector management, including transparency and accountability, regulatory reform, and public sector skills and leadership. Governance has political, economic, and administrative dimensions. It is particularly relevant to agriculture. For agriculture, political governance is the process of decision-making to formulate agricultural policy whereas economic governance emphasizes decision-making processes that affect economic activities and their relationships with the agricultural economy. Administrative governance deals with the implementation of policy. In most developing countries, the government tries to improve the agriculture and guarantee livelihoods via consultation with farmers’ organizations, NGOs, civil society, development economists, the private sector, and coordinate between the legal, economic and social systems, and institutions of governance (Stead 2015). Good governance for agriculture encourages better services by “bringing government closer to farmers”. Iran faces challenges in all of the World Bank's defined governance indicators (transparency and accountability, political stability, violence, government effectiveness, regulatory quality, rule of law, and corruption control). They used an indicator of governance from the World Bank which varies from -2.5 (the weakest) to 2.5 (the strongest). All governance indicators were negative for Iran, suggesting much room for improvement. Better governance would reduce internal and external barriers of development and improve the management of domestic resources by creating a more transparent regulatory structure. These changes could lead to faster growth in Iran’s agricultural sector. Meat plays a significant role in providing protein and calories for the Iranian population. Fluctuations in meat supply and demand affect people's food consumption patterns. Meat prices have been particularly volatile in recent years. The government is obliged to support increased production of animal protein (livestock and poultry) and they can accomplish this by improving agricultural (livestock) governance. Therefore, we investigate the role of governance in improving agricultural and livestock farming performance in this research.
Materials and Methods: After selecting the agricultural governance variables, we investigate the impact of agricultural governance variables on Iran’s livestock and meat market. An Equilibrium Displacement Model (EDM) is used to evaluate the effects of agricultural governance variables on producers and consumers of meat. The EDM model determines the effects of agricultural governance variables on price and quantity of livestock products by shifting the supply and demand functions before and after the implementation of agricultural governance variables with different scenarios. This is the first study to measure the impact of agricultural governance on vertical and horizontal meat markets by using an EDM. In order to assess the impact of agricultural governance on the livestock and meat markets, we consider the horizontal markets among cattle, chicken, and sheep, as well as vertical markets within each species, including the farm and retail markets. The specification of an EDM includes the percentage change in the price and quantity of each species (beef, chicken and mutton) in retail markets and farm markets.
Results and Discussion: The results of percentage change in the price (EP) and quantity (EQ) for the retail and farm level meat market after applying the agricultural governance variables of the Fifth Development Program are shown in Table (4) for 2018. After increasing agricultural governance in the meat market, the percentage change in price (EP) for beef, chicken and mutton are negative at the retail and farm level, and the percentage change of quantity (EQ) are positive at the retail and farm level. These results show the positive effect of implementing agricultural governance. Also, the results showed that annual investment growth at 2.23% has a larger effect on quantities at the farm level for chicken, beef and mutton. Growth in  cooperative expenditures (and production inputs) of 0.11% per year has a larger effect on retail prices for chicken; while the 0.21% annual growth of employment has smaller effects on retail prices for chicken. In addition, the annual investment growth variable has the largest effect among governance variables on the total surplus of meat producers.
Conclusion: According to the research findings, the investment variable has the largest impact on price. By increasing investment in the livestock sector, it is possible to use not only modern technology and equipment on livestock farms, but also to employ experts and skilled labor in the production process. Employing university graduates in the areas of farm management, nutrition, livestock and poultry production, animal health, and other technical areas could bring huge profits to producers. In addition, cooperatives play an important role in the marketing. When cooperatives enter the supply chain, there are improvements in input supply, assembly, processing, and product distribution.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Agricultural governance
  • Group participation
  • Meat Market
  • Equilibrium Displacement Model
1- Alizadeh A., Amadeh A., and Baqaian M. 2014. Impact of Economic Sanctions on Employment Level in Iran. Ministry of Science, Research and Technology - Allameh Tabatabai University, Department of Economics. (In Persian)
2- Bakhshoodeh M., and Fathi F. 2015. Study the relationship between demand for production units and demand for meat consumers in Iran. Economics and Agricultural Development, 28: 1-21.
3- Benson A., and Jafry T. 2013. The State of Agricultural Extension: An Overview and New Caveats for the Future. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, 19: 381-393.
4- Bitzar V., Bertus W., and de Steenhuijsen P. 2016. The governance of agricultural extension systems. kit working papers.
5- Chapman, M., Klassen, S., and Kreitzman, M. 2017 5 Key Challenges and Solutions for Governing Complex Adaptive (Food) Systems. In: Sustainability 9.
6- Chinsinga, B., and Cabral L. 2010. The limits of decentralized governance: the case of agriculture in Malawi. Policy Brief 33, Future Agricultures..
7- DÍaz, G. 2013. POLICY OPTIONS FOR AGRICULTURAL INVESTMENTS AND GOVERNANCE OF MARKETS. OXFAM RESEARCH REPORT AUGUST.
8- Division for democratic governance. 2002. The Political Institutions Participation in Democratic Governanc, Good Governance.
9- Donkor, S., and Ohiokpehai O. 1998. The relationship between food security and good governance. In: Africa HUGG International Symposium: Food Security and Governance in Africa. .
10- Elmenofi, G., Bilali H., and Sinisa B. 2014. Governance of rural development in Egypt. Annals of Agricultural Science, 59: 285–296.
11- Fan S., Jitsuchon S. and Methakunnavut N. 2004. The importance of public investment for reducing rural poverty in middle-income countries: the case of Thailand, DSGD Discussion, 7.
12- Hayami Y., Ruttan V. 1985. Agricultural Development: An International Perspective. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
13- Hosseini M., and Permeh Z. 2009. Evaluation of monopoly, competition and concentration in the meat, poultry and egg market in Iran. Science and Development Magazine, 30: 188-214. (In Persian)
14- International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). 2015. Agriculture and achieving the Millennium development goals. IFPRI, Washington, D.C., USA,. [online] URL: http://www.ifpri.org/pub lication/agriculture-and-achieving-millenniumdevelopment-goals.
15- Janssen, M., and Van der Voort H. 2016. Adaptive governance: Towards a stable, accountable and responsive government. Government Information Quarterly, 33: 1-5.
16- Jayachandran J. 2015. The Roots of Gender Inequality in Developing Countries. Annu. Rev. Econ, 7: 63–88.
17- Liu M., and Lio M. 2008. Governance and agricultural productivity: A cross-national analysis. Food Policy, 33: 504–512.
18- Moghadasi R., and Yousefi e. 2012. The discovery of prices in the chicken market, the application of directional non-cyclic diagrams. Agricultural Economics Research, 3: 79-98. (In Persian)
19- Kermani, M., And Aqeli, L. 2003. The Need for Promoting Cooperatives and Its in the Third Section of the Economy. Journal of Humanities, 2 (2): 127-148. (In Persian)
20- Mizan news. 2017. The Impact of Negotiations with Developing Countries on Agricultural Development. http://www.mizanonline.com/fa/news.
21- Moghadasi R., and Yousefi e. 2012. The discovery of prices in the chicken market, the application of directional non-cyclic diagrams. Agricultural Economics Research, 79-98.
22- Mogues, T., and Owusu-Baah K. 2014. Decentralizing agricultural public expenditures: findings from a scoping study at the onset of a new stage in Ghana’s decentralization reform. IFPRI, Accra, Ghana.
23- Mosaddegh F., Kazemi F., and Yelfani A. 2016. Investigating the effects and consequences of sanctions on foreign investment in Iran and the relationship between resistance economy and decreasing negative effects of sanctions. Research Papers on Economic Growth and Development, 2: 1-10. (In Persian)
24- Muth R. 1964. The derived demand curve for a productive factor and the industry supply curve. oxford economics papers, 16: 221-234.
25- Najafi B., Farajzadeh Z. 2001. The Role of Rural Cooperatives in Agricultural Product Marketing, Case Study of Fars Province, Taavon, 1(21): 1-25.
26- Patel A. 2017. Good Governance: A Key to enhance Agricultural Growth. https://indiamicrofinance.com/good-governance-agricultural-growth.html.
27- Poulton C. 2010. Agricultural Services and Decentralisation in Kenya. Policy Brief 035, Future Agricultures.
28- Ronaghi M., Mohammadi M., and Shahnoushi N. 2017. The Effect of Governance Indicators on Per Capita Income, Investment and ‎Employment in Selected Mena‏ ‏Countries. Journal of Iranian Economic Review. Iran. Econ. Rev. 2: 211-229.
29- Ronaghi M., Kohansal M., Reed M., and Ghorbani M. 2020. THE EFFECTS OF GOOD GOVERNANCE ON THE AGRICULTURAL SECTOR. International Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Science, 6(1): 11-28.
30- Sheng Y. 2015. What is Good Governance’, United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific.
31- Stead D. 2015. What does the quality of governance imply for urban prosperity. Habitat International, 45: 64-69.
32- Tomich T., Kilby P., and Johnston B. 1995. Transforming Agrarian Economies: Opportunities Seized, Opportunities Missed. Cornell University Press, Ithaca.
33- Wohlgnant M. 2012. Consumer demand and welfare in equilibrium displacement models. The oxford handbook of the economics of food consumotion and policy.
34- World Bank. 2015. Africa development indicators. World Bank, Washington, D.C., USA. [online]URL:http://siteresources.worldbank.org/AFRICAEXT/ Resources/english_essay_adi2010.pdf.
35- World Bank and IFPRI. 2015. Gender and governance in rural services: Insights from India, Ghana, and Ethiopia. Agriculture and Rural Development. Washington, DC, USA: The World Bank.
36- Zeranezhad M., and Sa'adat Mehr M. 2006. Estimation of demand for red meat in Iran. Humanities and Social Sciences Economic Research, 26: 63-82.