New Directions for Agriculture in Reducing Poverty

Economic Opportunity Mailing List Archive


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index]

market conditions



I respond to Vinay Chand's point that market conditions, particularly price, is 
more important than market access, which she suggests is nearly always there.
I wonder if this is generally true in, for instance, Sri Lanka, but not 
necessarily elsewhere? Perhaps market access is in fact an important barrier to 
switching from subsistence to commercial production for SSA smallholders? What 
is the additional evidence?
Second, Vinay Chand suggested that farmers will be more responsive to price 
movements as they receive a larger share of retail sale prices. This is 
important indeed and should be further developed. How do farmers receive larger 
shares of reatil prices? I suggest, by being in more competetive markets, i.e. 
those where they have more choice of sale channel.
Also, this 'share of the cake' argument is one of two determining factors. The 
other one is price elasticity, which in turn depends on the product type and 
the general demand conditions. This is more than just an academic point, as it 
influences the scope for different strategies that aim at giving the farmers a 
larger share of the cake.
A retailer who perceives increased demand can do either of two things in 
response: raise volume, or raise price. Both are ways to increase revenues 
(price times volume) and thereby profit.
Raising price will decrase demand, and the extent to which demand is decreased 
is defined in the demand price elasticity of the product. With high price 
elasticity, demand may fall so much in response to a price increase that profit 
may actually fall instead of rise. With low price elasticity, the retailer can 
raise price without much profit loss.
Whether or not the increase in price will be passed on to the farmer depends on 
competition. If there are enought other retailers who are potential buyers for 
the farmers, he or she will switch away from the one that does not pass on 
market price rises, to one that is willing to do so (or do so partly). 
The alternative retail response to extra market demand, raising volume, will 
bring in extra revenue, but will also imply extra costs, as the additional 
produce has to be bought fom the wholesaler or farmer. The profit opportunity 
here depends on the revenue-cost difference, i.e. the margin of the trader: the 
larger that is, the more will extra volume raise retailer profit.
A first conclusion is therefore that for products with a high price elasticity 
(which is true for many basic foodstuffs), retailers will typically want to 
raise volume not price in response to more demand. This benefits the farmer by 
increased demand for his product. However, farmers are often not able to 
respond effectively (especially, quickly enough) to increased demand, because 
of the time lag between their investment (sowing) and sale. They may then run 
behind the market, increasing its volatiltiy. This is the down side of a high 
price elasticity. Non-basic foodstuffs (anything but staples) have lower demand 
price elasticity. An implication is that switching away from staples may be an 
effective way of ensuring larger farmer shares in growing markets. A caveat is 
that this is likely to be feasible only in conditions of general growth: when 
purchasing power drops or is stagnant, sales of such non-staples are the first 
to fall. They have low demand price elasticity, but high income elasticity.
A second conclusion is that access to competetive markets matters, not just 
access to a market. If markets are non-competetive, price transmission will be 
weak or there will only be donwside price transmission: retailers may be in a 
position to absorp any price increases into their own profit, while passing on 
price falls to the farmer.


dr Dirk J. Bezemer

Research Officer, Overseas Development Institute
111 Westminster Bridge Road, London SE1 7JD, UK
phone: (0044) (020) 79220313
fax: (0044) (020) 79220399
e-mail: <address removed>
http://www.odi.org.uk/rpeg/staff.html#dirk

Visiting Research Associate, Imperial College
The College, Wye, Kent TN25 5AH, UK
phone: (0044) (020) 75942913
fax: (0044) (020) 75942838
e-mail: <address removed>
http://www.wye.ic.ac.uk/staff/biogs/bezemerd.html




Please visit dfid-agriculture-consultation.nri.org.