Cotton Plant Bulb
Page Tools: Button: Print Page Button: Share Button: RSS

Governance

Policy responses to volatile commodity prices

Regulatory Policy

I read an interesting paper produced by OECD recently, Policy Responses in Emerging Economies to International Agricultural Commodity Price Surges (2010), which examined short-term policy responses to the 2006-08 rise in commodity prices and analyzed their effectiveness in meeting policy objectives. This is particularly relevant today as cotton prices soar to all times high. Changes in trade flows, price transmission, inflation, consumption and production were also examined.

Overall, the study found that focused safety nets were best at sheltering poor households without disrupting the market, including creating negative price signals to farmers. An added benefit was that the conditions of the safety net could be adjusted as prices rose and fell, allowing greater flexibility over other interventions.

The researchers categorized government short-term policy responses into four types:

     1.     Market interventions to limit the rise in food prices

     2.     Market interventions to control inflation

     3.     Assistance to consumers through safety nets

     4.     Support to producers

The study found that most countries tried to limit the rise in food prices by directly affecting the price or increasing the supply of commodities by removing tariffs, increasing export taxes or reducing export price incentives. These usually reinforced existing policy themes and aligned with longer-term policy frameworks and objectives such as food security.

Export restrictions (e.g. bans, taxes, reduction in rebates) were found to significantly reduce exports of the covered commodities; however, these and other direct government interventions were not always effective in suppressing domestic price pressure. Additionally possible negative impacts included depression in prices discourage farmers from replanting the targeted crops.

OECD promotes shifting from outdated subsidies towards more progressive programs aimed at achieving its economic growth and poverty reduction targets. Traditional subsidies can distort consumption behavior and negatively influence policy decisions by keeping the cost of resources artificially low. Many developing countries will need to invest in their infrastructures to achieve the economic growth they aim to achieve.

Shifts towards programs that lift restrictions on foreign investments, improve access to land, improve enforcement of competition rules and cutting red tape. Progressive programs such as public-private partnerships will also be needed to make any significant headway on infrastructural improvements.  It is, however, worth noting that opportunities to secure funding through these public-private partnerships will likely be increased if more progressive investments that promote better agricultural practices, protection of ecosystems and provide basic worker protection as many funders are incorporating these criteria into program requirements.

Question

Are there measures that the cotton industry should be taking to strengthen governance in times of such price volatility?

You must be in the logged in and part of the Founder's group to view comments

This blog requires you to login to leave a comment.


LOGIN
Founders members please log in for additional content.