اثر آزادسازی تجاری بر تولید، مصرف و تجارت برنج

نوع مقاله : مقالات پژوهشی

نویسندگان

• لیلا راوند ¹
• آرش دوراندیش ¹
• محمود صبوحی ²

¹ دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد

² اقتصاد کشاورزی. دانشکده کشاورزی. دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد

https://doi.org/10.22067/jead2.v32i3.68802

چکیده

آزادسازی تجاری منجر به حذف کلیه تحریف‌های تجاری می‌شود و هدف نهایی آن تشکیل یک بازار واحد جهانی می‌باشد. برنج یکی از مهم‌ترین محصولات کشاورزی و استراتژیک بوده و نقش بسیار مهمی در تجارت و امنیت غذایی ایران و جهان دارد. این پژوهش با استفاده از الگوی تعادل جزئی بخش کشاورزی و بهینه‌سازی با استفاده از برنامه‌ریزی مثبت و رهیافت حداکثر بی‌نظمی مقطعی به بررسی اثر آزادسازی تجاری بر تولید، مصرف و تجارت برنج در استان‌های تولیدکننده عمده برنج ایران (مازندران، گیلان، خوزستان، گلستان و فارس) پرداخته است. برای این منظور از میانگین داده‌های تولید، مصرف و تجارت برای سال‌های 1393 و 1394 به‌عنوان سال پایه استفاده گردید و الگو با استفاده از نرم افزار GAMS برآورد گردید. سناریوهای مورد بررسی شامل کاهش نرخ‌ تعرفه واردات برنج به میزان 10، 25، 50، 75، 90 و 100 درصد بود. نتایج نشان داد که با کاهش نرخ‌ تعرفه واردات سطح زیرکشت برنج دانه بلند و دانه متوسط در استان مازندران به‌ترتیب 61/0 و 38/3 درصد، در استان گیلان 49/0 و 18/9 درصد، در استان گلستان 82/2 و 32/4 درصد، در استان خوزستان 90 و 6/0 درصد و در استان فارس 47/24 و 47/2 درصد کاهش می‌یابد و سطح زیرکشت برنج دانه کوتاه در استان‌ گلستان 93/22 درصد و در استان فارس 33/43 درصد کاهش می‌یابد. مجموع کل میزان مصرف، واردات و صادرات برنج دانه بلند، متوسط و کوتاه نیز افزایش می‌یابد. میزان افزایش رفاه خالص اجتماعی بسیار کم و حدود 2/0 درصد، رفاه مصرف‌کنندگان حدود 11 درصد و رفاه دولت نیز حدود 11 درصد افزایش می‌یابد، رفاه تولیدکنندگان نیز به اندازه 2 درصد کاهش می‌یابد. بنابراین با ایجاد تکنولوژی‎‌های جدید و روش‌های نوین کاشت مانند کشت هیدروپونیک که منجر به افزایش عملکرد و افزایش بهره‌وری آب در واحد سطح می‌شوند و کاشت ارقامی از برنج که در هر استان مزیت نسبی دارند می‌توان برنج ایرانی را حفظ نمود و بخشی از کاهش رفاه ‌تولیدکنندگان را جبران نمود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

• آزادسازی تجاری
• برنج
• برنامه‌ریزی اثباتی
• تعرفه
• حداکثر بی‌نظمی مقطعی

20.1001.1.20084722.1397.32.3.1.4

عنوان مقاله [English]

Effect of Trade Liberalization on Production, Consumption and Trade of Rice

نویسندگان [English]

• L. Ravand ¹
• A. Dourandish ¹
• M. Sabuhi ²

¹ Ferdowsi university of Mashhad

² Ferdowsi university of Mashhad

چکیده [English]

Introduction: Globalization is an inevitable process that one of its consequences is the liberalization of trade and the reduction of protectionism. Trade liberalization causing the heavily interdependent economics of the countries around the world to reduce customs and trade barriers to a minimum level, and make financial transfers between countries easily done. Rice is the most important and strategic crop after wheat and plays a significant role in trade and food security of the world and Iran. Because it provides more than 20% of human total daily calories and Almost two thirds of the world's population depends on rice for food. The total Production of Rice in Iran during 2012-2013 was about 2.3 million ton and about 93% of rice products are yielded in Gilan, Mazandaran, Khuzestan, Golestan and Fars provinces. About 88% of total production of rice in Iran is allocated to domestic consumption while just 12% of goes to the world market. Total consumption of rice in Iran is about 3.2 million ton.
Materials and Methods: The model that is used in this study is Agricultural sector partial equilibrium model with endogenous prices. The data used in present study are the average of production, consumption, export, import and area under cultivation quantity, which export and import prices for long, medium and short grain rice and import tariffs for two growing years of 2011-12 and 2012-13 are considered. These information are provided from agriculture jihad organization of Iran, Customs Office of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the book of export-import regulations. In current research, at first simple linear demand function is calibrated for long, medium and short grain rice based on demand price elasticity. The supply function involves two parts: domestic supply function and export supply function. The calibration of domestic supply is done by a Maximum Entropy integrated PMP method and calibration of export supply function is based on export supply price elasticity. It should be noted that the demand elasticities used in current study are captured from various studies and the export supply elasticities are taken as unity following Aydın et al (2004). Constraints that are used in the model are comprised of the constraints of area under cultivations, water, chemical fertilizer, variable costs, constraint of commodity balance and constraints of calibration includes area under cultivation and export.
Results and Discussion: The investigated scenarios are the reduction of import tariffs for rice by 10, 25, 50, 75, 90 and 100 percent. The results of present study showed that The area under cultivation of long and medium grain rice, compared to the base year (2012 and 2013 will decrease about 0.61 and 3.38 percent), in Mazandaran province, about 0.49 and 9.18 percent in Gilan province, about 2.82 and 4.32 percent in Golestan province , about 90 and 0.6 percent in Khuzestan province and about 24.47 and 2.47 in Fars province t. Short grain rice in Golestan province will decrease about 22.93 percent and in Fars province will decrease about 43.33 percent. Generally, with decreasing tariff rates, the long, medium and short grain rice, compared to the base year (2012 and 2013), will decrease about 21.5, 4 and 11.5 percent, respectively. Also, the consumption of long, medium and short grain rice will increase by 0.5, 1.1 and 0.7 percent, respectively. The average import of long, medium and short grain rice will increase by 5, 11 and 33.5 percent, respectively and Exports of long, medium and short grain rice also will increase by about 7.7%, 11.7% and 11.43% as a result of tariff cuts. Also, the net social welfare due to the reduction of rice tariff rates relative to the base year, will increase about 0.2 percent. The average welfare of consumers will increase about 1% and the welfare of producers will decrease about 1.7 percent compared to the base year. Also the welfare of the state will increase about 9.5 percent compared to the base year.
Conclusions: Considering small cultivated pieces of land, the high cost of production, the lack of relative advantage in the production of some types of rice and also the high waste of factories in the country, trade liberalization can be fruitful. Considering the importance of product advantages in producing, exporting and importing as well the best quality of Iranian rice, creating new technologies and new planting methods such as hydroponic cultivation, which leads to increased performance and increased water productivity per unit area, and also planting kinds of rice which have advantages in each province would conclude increasing the welfare of rice producers.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

• Cross Sectional ME
• PMP
• Rice
• Tariff
• WTO

مراجع

1-Abyar N.M., Razaghi M.H., and Asgari M. 2016. Determine the relative advantage of wheat, barley and rice production in Golestan province. Research Findings in Crops Production, 1(1):1-12. (In Persian)

2-Anderson K., and Martin W. 2005. Agricultural trade reform and the Doha development Agenda. The World Economy, 28(9): 1301-1327.

3-Anderson K., Martin W., and Valenzuela E. 2006. The relative importance of global agricultural subsidies and market access. World Trade Review, 5(03): 357-376.

4-Arndt S.W. 1997. Globalization and trade: A symposium. The world Economy, 20(5): 695-707.

5-Aydin M.F., Çıplak U., and Yücel M.E. 2004. Export supply and import demand models for the Turkish economy. The Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey Research Department Working Paper, 4(09): 1-29.

6-Bagheri M., and Najafi B. 2011. Investigating the welfare effects of reducing import tariffs in the rice market. Journal of Agricultural Economics Research, 3(1): 181-194. (In Persian)

7-Bagheri M., Hojjatzadeh A., and Rezaei M. 2009. Implementation of principle of trade liberalization in the WTO: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Law and Policy Research, 11(27): 9-28. (In Persian)

8-Bas M., and Strauss-Kahn V. 2015. Input-trade liberalization, export prices and quality upgrading. Journal of International Economics, 95(2): 250-262.

9-Bauer S. 1998. Historical review, experience and perspectives in sector modeling. Proceeding of 16 th symposium of the European Association of Agriculture Economists. 14-15 April, Kiel, Wissenschaftsverlag vauk, 3-22.

10-Bauer S., and Kasnakoglu H.1990. Non-linear programming models for sector and policy analysis. Experiences with the Turkish agricultural sector model. Economic Modeling, 7(3): 275-290.

11-Dabrowski J.M., Murray K., Ashton P.J., and Leaner J.J. 2009. Agricultural impacts on water quality and implications for virtual water trading decisions. Ecological Economics, 68: 1074–1082.

12-Eruygur H.O. 2005. Impacts of policy changes on Turkish agriculture: an optimization model with maximum entropy. PhD Thesis, Middle East Technical University.

13-Fakhraie A., and Norouzi F. 2007. Demand Error Correction model for different types of imported and domestic rice in Iran. Iranian Journal of Economic Research, 9(30): 135-119. (In Persian)

14-Fan H., Li Y.A., and Yeaple S.R. 2015. Trade liberalization, quality, and export prices. Review of Economics and Statistics, 97(5): 1033-1051.

15-FAO (food and agricultural organization of united nation). 2014. FAOSTAT database.

16-Ghaderi Kh., and Torkamani J. 2003. Estimation of rice supply and demand functions for the Period 1966-2000 (With static and convergence tests). 4th Iranian Agricultural Economics Conference.

17-Gilanpour A., and Yazdani S. 1996. Impact of trade organization on Iran rice economy, Iranian Journal of Agricultural Science, 28(2): 26-19. (In Persian with English abstract)

18-Goudarzi M. 2009. Determination of the relative advantage of different varieties of rice in Mazandaran province. Journal of Agricultural Economics Research, 1(1): 56-35. (In Persian)

19-Haghighat J., Aref Eshghi T., and Javedan A. 2014. Effect of trade liberalization on corn import in Iran. Business Research. 12(64): 82-92.

20-Hazell P.B.R., and Norton R.G. 1986. Mathematical programming for economic analysis in agriculture. Macmillan. New York, 31(8): 930-930.

21-Heckelei T., and Britz W. 1999. Maximum entropy specification of PMP in CAPRI. University of Bonn, CAPRI Working Paper, 99-108.

22-Heckelei T., and Britz W. 2000. Positive mathematical programming with multiple data points: a cross-sectional estimation procedure. Cahiers d'Economie et de Sociologies Rurales, 57: 27-50.

23-Heidary H., Davoudi N., and Pashazanousi M. 2015. The effect of agricultural tariff reduction on macroeconomic variables using global trade analysis project. Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development, 3(29): 308-318.

24-Hoang H.K., and Meyers W.H. 2015. Price stabilization and impacts of trade liberalization in the Southeast Asian rice market. Food Policy, 57(30): 26-39.

25-Howitt R.E. 1995. Positive mathematical programing. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 77(2): 329-342.

26-Iran Development and Trade Organization 2015, the book of export and import regulations of different years. (In Persian)

27-Jihad agriculture organization of Iran 2015, Statistical Yearbook of agriculture 2014 and 2015. (In Persian)

28-Khoso I., Ram N., Ghumro I.A., and Shaikh F.M. 2011. Empirical analysis of implication of WTO on rice market. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 3(2): 159-165.

29-McCarl B.A.1982. Cropping activities in agricultural sector models: a methodological proposal. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 64(4): 768-772.

30-McCarl B.A., and Spreen T.H. 1997. Applied mathematical programing using algebraic systems. Economics, 19: 207-218.

31-Mohammadi H. 2012. Effects of trade liberalization on the welfare of consumers and producers of agricultural products, Exchange of virtual water and sustainability of resources: Case study in Fars province, Journal of Agricultural Economics. 6(3): 176-145. (In Persian)

32- Mohammadi H., and Soltani GH. 2000. Estimates of cereal import demand function. Third Conference of Agricultural Economics. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran. (In Persian)

33-Mousavi S.H., and Esmaeily A. 2011. Analysis of the effects of import tariff policy on Iran's rice market. Journal of Agricultural Economics Research, 3(2): 1-20. (In Persian)

34-Mukhtar T. 2008. Doha Round of WTO and the rice sector of Pakistan. Zagreb International Review of Economics and Business, 11(2): 19-34.

35-Noori K. 2002. Determine the Relative advantage of production of major rice groups in Gilan and Mazandaran. Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development, 10(40): 45-25. (In Persian)

36-Noori K. 2006. A Study on market distortions and its effects on rice supply, demand and import in Iran. Journal of Research and Development in Agriculture and Horticulture, 73: 25-17. (In Persian with English abstract)

37-Noori K., and Yazdani S. 2000. Globalization of the economy and its effects on the agricultural sector of Iran (Case study of rice and dates). 3th Iranian Agricultural Economics Conference. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran. 247-264.

38-Önal H., and McCarl B.A. 1989. Aggregation of heterogeneous firms in mathematical programming models. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 16(4): 499-513.

39-Önal H., and McCarl B.A. 1991. Exact aggregation in mathematical programming sector models. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 39(2): 319-334.

40-Paris Q., and Howitt R.E.1998. An analysis of ill-posed production problems using maximum entropy. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 80(1): 124-138.

41-Rasouli N.M., Seyahpoush Z., and Sadrabadi M.H. 2016. Globalization of Iran's economy and its impact on the agricultural sector: case study of wheat. International Conference on Modern Research in Management, Economics and Accounting, Institute of Ideological Managers, Iliya Capital. (In Persian with English abstract)

42-Sabouhi M., and Ahmad pour M. 2013. Effect of subsidies targeting on agricultural sector in Iran (Regional modeling of agricultural sector). Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, 15(2): 157-182. (In Persian)

43-Samuelson P.A. 1952. Spatial price equilibrium and linear programming. American Economic Review, 42 (2): 283-303.

44-Santos‐Paulino A., and Thirlwall A.P. 2004. The impact of trade liberalization on exports, imports and the balance of payments of developing countries. The Economic Journal, 114(493): 50-72.

45-Sharif S., Javed M.S., Abbas A., Hassan S., and Salam A. 2008. Impact of WTO’s trade liberalization on selected food crops in Pakistan [with Comments]. The Pakistan Development Review, 47(4): 547-563.

46-Takayama T., and Judge G.C. 1964. Spatial equilibrium and quadratic programming. Journal of Farm Economics, 46(1): 67-93.

47-Tayebi S.K., and Ghanbari A. 2007. The effect of accession to the WTO on Iran’s saffron market. Sixth Iranian Agricultural Economics Conference, Mashhad, Iran Agricultural Economics Association, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad. (In Persian with English abstract)

48-World Rice Statistics Online Query Facility - IRRI. www.ricestat.irri.org, 8080/wrsv3/entrypoint.htm.

49-World Trade Organization - Home page. www.wto.org/english/res_e/res_e.htm.

50-Zakaria M. 2014. Effects of trade liberalization on exports, imports and trade balance in Pakistan: A Time Series Analysis. Prague Economic Papers, 23(1): 121-139.

51-Zakirfar N. 2005. Liberation and its effects on employment level in Iran. Master's thesis, Islamic Azad University Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch. (In Persian)

52-Zhu J., Yu W., Wang J., and Elleby C. 2016. Tariff liberalization, Price transmission and rural welfare in china. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 67(1): 24-46.

53-Zoughipour A., and Zibaei M. 2009. The effect of trade liberalization on key variables in Iran’s agricultural sector. A generalizable general equilibrium model. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 3(4): 67-93. (In Persian)