Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  78 / 272 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 78 / 272 Next Page
Page Background

Reviewing Agricultural Trade Policies

To Promote Intra-OIC Agricultural Trade

66

Table 3. 15 Factors Limiting Agr. Trade's Contribution to Development & Food Security

Statement

Response Rate

Low farmer prices

73.9%

Stringent technical measures

60.9%

High tariffs

50.0%

No diversified export markets

41.3%

No diversified export products

28.3%

High taxes and charges

21.7%

No diversified import markets.

10.9%

Others (specified by the participant)

8.7%

Bureaucratic hurdles

The lack of global agricultural policy

Transport and trade facilitation procedures

No diversified import products

4.4%

Source: Authors’ calculations

The messages originating from two critical multiple-response questions are summarized in

Tables 3.15 and 3.16. These are critical (i) in shedding light on which factors adversely affect the

role of agricultural trade on overall economic development of the country and on the status of

food security and (ii) in identifying which factors affect agricultural trade flows of the country.

Around 57% of participants indicate that there are (agricultural) commodity or marketing

boards in their countries, and around 74% of participants believe that these commodity boards

are and will be important for facilitating foreign trade in these products.

Table 3. 16 Factors Affecting Agricultural Trade Flows

Status

Very

poor

Below

average

Average

Above

average

Excellent

Marketing knowledge and

information

13.0%

21.7%

52.2%

13.0%

0.0%

Human resources

2.2%

21.7%

41.3%

28.3%

6.5%

Financial resources

10.9%

30.4%

41.3%

17.4%

0.0%

Quality of the products

0.0%

13.0%

47.8%

32.6%

6.5%

Standardization of the products

4.4%

32.6%

39.1%

19.6%

4.4%

Technical adaptability of the

producers

10.9%

15.2%

52.2%

17.4%

4.4%

Source: Authors’ calculations

The reasons that are stated regarding the role of marketing boards mainly revolve around the

boards’ contribution to trade facilitation by

specializing on one particular product that has its own opportunities and challenges,

promoting the product in international markets,

ensuring that higher quality products are served through provided market information

and packaging services to producers, and

leading to better long-term planning and to the use of more productive techniques.

It is indicated by around 61% of participants that there are state-owned enterprises (SOEs) in

their countries. A majority of the participants (roughly 59% of them) state that SOEs are and

will be contributing to trade facilitation. Contrary to the case of marketing boards, a larger

fraction of participants states a set of concerns and reservations about the effectiveness of SOEs.