New Articles

Mitsubishi Corporation Invests in ThinkIQ to Accelerate Smart Manufacturing Solutions in Japan

thinkiq

Mitsubishi Corporation Invests in ThinkIQ to Accelerate Smart Manufacturing Solutions in Japan

ThinkIQ, a trailblazer in digital manufacturing transformation, has secured an investment from Mitsubishi Corporation, marking a collaborative effort to expedite the adoption of smart manufacturing solutions in Japan. The investment, the terms of which were not disclosed, signifies Mitsubishi’s commitment to driving digital transformation across its industrial supply chains. ThinkIQ’s open platform, developed in collaboration with global smart manufacturing and Industry 4.0 initiatives, aligns with Mitsubishi’s vision for advancing digital capabilities.

Doug Lawson, CEO of ThinkIQ, expressed gratitude for the recognition from Mitsubishi Corporation, emphasizing the platform’s ability to enhance the efficiency of complex manufacturing supply chains. The strategic partnership and Mitsubishi’s investment aim to broaden market reach and accelerate efforts to provide end-to-end visibility in supply chain management.

Yoshiyuki Watanabe, Division COO of Mitsubishi Corporation, highlighted the meticulous research and diligence in selecting ThinkIQ as the technology partner to drive digital transformation in industrial supply chains. Anticipating a significant impact, Watanabe emphasized the potential of ThinkIQ’s solutions to improve yield, quality, safety, and compliance while minimizing waste and environmental impact. The investment reflects Mitsubishi’s confidence in ThinkIQ’s innovative platform and leadership in digital transformation for the manufacturing sector.

ThinkIQ’s Software as a Service (SaaS) platform establishes comprehensive visibility on the manufacturing shop floor, connecting to legacy and smart equipment, IoT sensors, and operational technology (OT) and information technology (IT) systems. The platform aggregates relevant data into a single analytics platform, providing context, meaning, and discoverability for all participants in supply chain and manufacturing operations. ThinkIQ Vision introduces vision-processing software combined with advanced Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence capabilities, utilizing standard cameras on the shop floor as sensors to eliminate blind spots and enhance data for Continuous Intelligence.

Optical Fiber Cables

The Transition to 5G to Boost Demand for Optical Fiber

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘World – Optical Fiber Cables – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends and Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

As countries implement 5G networks, the increased demand is predicted to significantly drive the market for optical fiber to reach 1.5M tonnes by 2030. This new generation of mobile broadband will require building dense networks of base stations connected by optical fiber cables.  In the near future, the U.S., China, Japan and the EU should become the most lucrative markets for sales and distribution of fiber optics.

Key Trends and Insights

The optical fiber market faces a new era of development as 5G networks are implemented all over. The next-generation network will require a significantly larger amount of fiber optic base stations because it uses a high-frequency signal that cannot cover large distances. There is no alternative to optical fiber, as it is the only effective cable material that provides the necessary high data transfer rates. As a consequence, the demand for optical fiber is expected to sky-rocket and the global optical fiber market could reach 1.5M tonnes by 2030.

The U.S., China and Japan demonstrate the highest potential for consumption of optical fiber due to their emphasis on developing infrastructure for fifth-generation networks. The U.S. in all likelihood may become the largest consumer of optical fiber due to the size of its territory. Saudia Arabia, the EU and Australia are also actively implementing 5G technology.

Currently, China has installed approx. 70% of the world’s base stations, making it the largest consumer of the optical fiber at 135K tonnes in 2020 and leading all other countries with its rate for implementing 5G. According to the 14th Five-Year Plan (2021-2025), the number of 5G base stations in China will double by 2022 and by 2023 the total will surpass 5.1M.

The U.S. comes in second for consumption with 125K tonnes in 2020. The Biden administration has announced that it will allocate $100B to develop the infrastructure for broadband access within its eight-year plan. This should accelerate the expansion of the country’s 5G network coverage.

The Japanese government declared that implementing 5G is one of the government’s highest priorities while Japanese telecom companies plan to invest more than $14B into infrastructure for 5G networks, including base stations, server equipment and optical fiber.

Optical fiber is the ideal material that can achieve the high performance claimed by 5G, as it provides over 1K times as much bandwidth as a copper link. The lack of alternatives and overall demand for optical fiber will make this segment of the cable industry more and more attractive for investment.

Global Optical Fiber Cable Consumption

In 2020, the global optical fiber cables market decreased by -3.9% to $13.7B for the first time since 2017, thus ending a two-year rising trend. In general, consumption, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2018 with an increase of 9.7% year-to-year. Over the period under review, the global market reached the peak level at $14.4B in 2012; however, from 2013 to 2020, consumption failed to regain momentum.

The countries with the highest volumes of optical fiber cables consumption in 2020 were China (135K tonnes), the U.S. (125K tonnes) and Mexico (61K tonnes), together comprising 31% of global consumption.

In value terms, the U.S. ($2.3B), China ($1.4B) and France ($788M) were the countries with the highest levels of market value in 2020, together accounting for 33% of the global market.

The countries with the highest levels of optical fiber cables per capita consumption in 2020 were France (625 kg per 1000 persons), Turkey (486 kg per 1000 persons) and Mexico (453 kg per 1000 persons).

Global Optical Fiber Exports

For the ninth year in a row, the global market recorded growth in overseas shipments of optical fiber cables, which increased by 6.7% to 596K tonnes in 2020. In value terms, optical fiber cables exports contracted to $6.8B (IndexBox estimates) in 2020.

China dominates optical fiber cable export structure, resulting in 344K tonnes, which was near 58% of total exports in 2020. Mexico (46K tonnes) ranks second in terms of total exports with a 7.7% share, followed by the U.S. (6.7%). The following exporters – Poland (13K tonnes), Spain (12K tonnes), South Korea (12K tonnes), Germany (12K tonnes) and Romania (11K tonnes) – each amounted to a 10% share of total exports.

In value terms, the largest optical fiber cables supplying countries worldwide were China ($2B), the U.S. ($1B) and Mexico ($702M), with a combined 55% share of global exports. These countries were followed by Poland, Germany, South Korea, Romania and Spain, which together accounted for a further 14%.

In 2020, the average optical fiber cables export price amounted to $11,350 per tonne, which is down by -16.8% against the previous year. From 2012 to 2020, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by the UK, while the other global leaders experienced mixed trends in the import price figures.

Source: IndexBox Platform

japan

Global Trade Talk: How Japan is Utilizing the Coronavirus as a Catalyst for Economic and Structural Change and Increased Multilateral Cooperation

Global Trade Talk is part of an ongoing series highlighting international business, trade, investment, and site location issues and opportunities.

This article focuses on the conversation between Mr. Takeshi Tashiro, Director of Policy Planning and Research Office, Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (Japan) and Keith Rabin, President, KWR International, Inc.

 

Hello Mr. Tashiro, it is a pleasure to meet you and to be speaking with a Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry (METI) official, who our firm has worked to support for many years. Before we begin, can you tell our readers about your background and current activities?

Thank you. My name is Takeshi Tashiro and I am a Director of Policy Planning and Research Office at the Trade Policy Bureau of METI. In this capacity, I provide international economic and policy analysis and help to develop planning options. Earlier in my career, I supported the development of “Abenomics”, the economic policies that have guided Japan since Shinzō Abe was elected to his second term as Prime Minister in December 2012. It is based on “three arrows”, including monetary easing from the Bank of Japan, fiscal stimulus through government spending, and structural reform. I also lived in the United States for three years while working at a think tank in Washington and studying for my master’s degree in public policy at Harvard’s Kennedy School. So, my work has focused on how to strengthen the Japanese economy, both domestically and internationally, how to alleviate deflation, and how to build economic ties and supply chains with Japan’s neighbors and other countries around the world.

Most recently, I directed the preparation of METI’s annual White Paper on International Economy and Trade 2020. It was released in July and includes our latest thinking on a wide range of issues. METI has been preparing annual White Papers for 72 years, and the current edition focuses on the Coronavirus pandemic, its impact on the global and Japanese economy, and trade policy direction.

While Japan is one of the world’s most advanced, and its third-largest economy, it attracts relatively little attention from international companies and investors. This is partially due to demographic pressures and several decades of perceived stagnation. Why is Japan underappreciated, what are its strengths and weaknesses, and can you give us some insight into the current state of Japan’s economy and why companies and investors should be paying more attention?

I think it is not just companies and investors, but the world itself should pay more attention to Japan. Our economy possesses many interesting opportunities – while providing lessons on pressing issues, including how to deal with an aging society, low growth, low-interest rates, and deflation. Larry Summers has described this as “secular stagnation” (some call this “Japanification”) and I believe the force of secular stagnation will become one of the world’s most formidable challenges as the effects of the Coronavirus pandemic crisis – which is the greatest economic disruption since the great depression – continues to rise. We don’t know when a vaccine will become available and despite rising asset prices – given abundant central bank liquidity – companies will be reluctant to expand and make long-term investments in this uncertain environment. That creates a rising propensity for savings, which has also been the main cause of Japan’s long stagnation for the past few decades.

Many people only look at the negative side, but it is important to also understand that even as Japan faced this long stagnation, it has silently transformed itself while maintaining social stability and high quality of life. There are so many interesting changes. One as you mentioned, is the strength of our development as a trading nation following the second world war, when we accumulated a large surplus though companies as Sony and Toyota manufactured products in Japan. That changed, however. Costs rose and we faced pressures from trading partners over surpluses and as a result Japan became an “investing nation”, optimizing supply and production chains by establishing facilities in developing and developed markets around the world. Although Japanese companies have expanded their overseas operations, Japan enjoys a relatively low unemployment rate among advanced economies. We leverage off Asian neighbors and their growing power and desire to develop themselves, both to maintain our own competitiveness and to grow their economies.

Given the difficulties Japan has faced in recent decades, coping with domestic stagnation, an aging society, and depressed demand, Japanese companies have enjoyed relatively strong performance and profitability, and one has to ask how this was achieved. The answer is through dedicated efforts to work overseas and establish a long-term presence in these economies. The Japanese government is also moving to understand the needs of countries in the region and to facilitate local and regional development while encouraging Japanese firms to optimize supply chains and production and to sell Japanese brands, products, components, and services in these markets and third countries around the world.

In the process, it has become more difficult to say that a company belongs to any one nation. Yes, the nationality of the company remains Japanese, but they rely on partnerships, labor and other agreements with other companies, people and institutions in the countries where they operate.  That is how Japan has maintained its edge and competitiveness in a globalized world, at a time when our own economy faces many challenges. In recent years, however, we are becoming increasingly concerned with the rising backlash against globalization and increased nationalist pressures. That is creating a wide range of risks as well.

Other nations, however, particularly mature economies that face similar, though perhaps fewer extreme challenges such as an aging population, can draw from this experience,  recognizing the benefits of expanded international trade and engagement.

Japan possesses formidable strength as an industrial and manufacturing power. This is true, not only in terms of consumer- and end-products, but even more so in terms of components, technology and machinery which is essential to the production of well-known products and brands from other nations and global supply chains across a wide range of sectors. Can you talk about Japan’s industrial strength and capacity, its role as a technology leader and as a critical link within global manufacturing and supply chains?

In addition to Japanese branded products, our companies provide important goods and components for brands and products all over the world as well as the machinery from which they are made. For example, without Japanese companies, you might not be able to obtain iPhones as many critical components are Japanese, even though the product itself is not from Japan. That is how global supply chains are now structured. Japanese firms provide components not only for iPhones but for automobiles, computers, airplanes, and other products. So even though Japanese firms face increased competition from Korean, Chinese, European, and other brands, inside these products you will find many Japanese parts and components, and, in some cases, they are Japanese-managed production on an OEM basis.

Therefore, while in the US you see many Toyota’s, Honda’s and other Japanese cars on the road, which are highly successful, I think our strength is based more on our ability to establish, manage and optimize complex supply chains. This allows us to compete in, and contribute to the development of, industries and countries all over the world, both in terms of sourcing and manufacturing, as well as distribution to businesses and consumers.

For example, Japanese manufacturers build plants in the US, Southeast Asia, and other markets. These provide jobs, investment, and products that boost local and national economies, within markets that enjoy stronger growth rates than Japan. This allows our companies to expand and to grow and enjoy profitability far beyond what they could find in our economy.

I think that is one major industrial strength of Japan, and global supply chains are especially important for our economy. This necessitates a careful balance between efficiencies and disruption – including not only concerns over a host of trade issues but events such as the coronavirus pandemic. So, this reliance on trade and global supply chains is a strength but it is also a risk. It requires careful and ongoing reexamination so that our companies and economy do not become too dependent on any single source of supply and outlet so that we achieve sufficient diversification and have options given inevitable disruptions moving forward.

For many decades Japan-focused heavily on its relationship with the United States, both as its largest trading partner and as a guarantor of its security, as well as sales to Europe and other developed economies. As costs within Japan rose and China emerged as an alternative, Japan took advantage of its low-cost labor, and then targeted the market as consumption rose while demand was stagnating in Japan and exhibiting low growth in the US and other advanced economies. Today, China is the world’s second-largest economy.

It has become more assertive and there is growing concern about supply chain diversification as well as national and technological security, as seen in tensions in the South China Sea, events in Hong Kong, and the conflict over Huawei technology. We also note Japan’s recent announcement that it will be subsidizing companies to diversify their production base to strengthen supply chain resilience. What are your thoughts on this transformation? What does it mean for Japan and the region? What are the global obstacles and reasons behind it?

The role of China has been evolving and it is an important neighbor of ours. Economically it is rising rapidly, both as a source of production as well as a market for Japanese products and components. Growth has been strong over many decades and as you noted it is now the world’s second-largest economy. At the same time, we need to be careful not to become too concentrated or dependent on any trading partner. As I mentioned, if companies or Japan as a whole, places too much production, for example in electrical machinery, electronics or critical components, etc. in one geographic location, it can become dangerous, causing supply constrictions that can lead to major disruptions far beyond that product.

That is a trade-off we must address, particularly when considering the pandemic that has caused so much disruption to logistics and supply across the world. In fact, we need to consider this with every country though in the case of China it is particularly important given its growing size, proximity and the concentration of manufacturing and production-based there. We introduced subsidies for Japanese companies to diversify their supply chain. This is an initiative that seeks to maximize supply chain resilience across a range of industries for the benefit of the region and the global economy as a whole.

At the same time, even though Japan has become increasingly open to foreign workers, which some analysts believe could encompass up to about 5-6% of our total workforce by 2030, we recognize domestic production alone is not the answer. Aside from cost issues, we have also experienced disruptions from natural disasters in Japan such as the 2011 earthquake and we understand both the importance of diversification and that many products can be made more efficiently elsewhere. As a result, China became an important center of production and market for Japan.

In the US the coronavirus is generally viewed as a traumatic, but hopefully temporary obstacle, to be overcome so we can get back to “normal” as quickly as possible. At the same time some analysts in other countries, while recognizing the urgent need to address the pandemic, view it more as an accelerator of changes that have been occurring over the last decade, rather than a short-term phenomenon to be resolved once a vaccine is in place. While we hear Japan has been relatively successful in suppressing its spread, how has the coronavirus affected Japan? What are the regional and global implications, and do you view the virus more as a temporary obstacle or a transformational accelerant of trends already in motion? If the latter, what actions should governments and companies undertake to maintain and enhance their competitiveness moving forward?

I think we have to make this crisis an accelerator of change – though our success in doing so is likely to depend on our ability to join together, both within Japan, as well as other countries, to move in that direction. It would be unfortunate to just view it as a temporary traumatic obstacle and we have already seen dramatic changes of behavior and acceleration of trends that were underway. The rise of e-commerce, use of video conferencing, and more flexible workplace are just a few examples and are unlikely to reverse even after effective treatment and inoculation are available. To me, seeing so many people in the US and the western world wearing masks is quite surprising. It is something I could not have imagined when I lived in the US a short while ago.

Many other changes are underway, and we are developing policies to make the crisis work for us. This includes improving public health, infrastructure, supply chain, and other issues while allowing social distancing and our economy to reopen. In Japan, people wear masks as we learned from the pandemic a century ago and have high concern over spreading illness. That has allowed Japan, as you noted, to be successful in suppressing the spread. As other nations adopt, we will all be more prepared moving forward.

As a result, Japan is taking a comprehensive approach to encourage this transformation. We are working to create a new lifestyle that better allows social distancing to prevent illness and save and protect lives. Initiatives to facilitate digital transformation, online and digital payments, teleworking and telemedicine are all underway. I think even though, or because, this crisis is extremely traumatic we need to recognize and address the obstacles that are presented and use them as catalysts for needed change. Even though a therapeutic approach is needed to resolve the crisis, supplemented by provisions of liquidity to minimize economic disruption, we also recognize this is an opportunity to address and remove structural problems that have long troubled our economy.

That includes the need to digitalize our economy and our government and healthcare and payment systems. So, we are now trying to change our society and the crisis is helping to showcase the need to move more rapidly in that direction. The role of government is to help provide this support. The Japanese government is using fiscal stimulus not only to provide liquidity support to households and businesses but also to push telework and other forms of digital transformation.

The coronavirus pandemic has accelerated global efforts to stimulate national economies through massive stimulus programs similar to those that have existed in Japan for many years. This is leading to ever-accelerating levels of global debt which seem manageable when interest rates are at record lows and even negative in many countries – but potentially troubling for the long term. Similarly, many believe the world would be better off with a shift from monetary to fiscal solutions and infrastructure development.  Japan also has a lot of experience in this area as well. What are your views on the present health of the international economic system? What can the world learn from Japan and would a fiscal approach produce better results and help countries better deal with massive unemployment and the business trauma that has accompanied the pandemic?

The initial stimulus packages enacted at the onset of the coronavirus have been very effective. It is essential that we cope with the pandemic with the necessary tools both in terms of health and the economy. As a result, the US, Japan and other nations supported by their central banks invoked stimulus programs at an unprecedented scale, with low or in some cases negative interest rate policies, which have helped to contain and minimize the effect of the disruptions that have occurred. This was basically the right move and necessary to confront the panic and initial effects of the pandemic.

Now, however, our attention is shifting to how to reopen our economies longer-term while maintaining social distancing and addressing other measures that constrain economic activity. This is difficult as if we stimulate and encourage face-face contact – infection rates will rise. So that is a major challenge. We have to proceed carefully, crafting measures that provide sufficient effect at an unprecedented scale, while accounting for necessary public health safety as well as concerns over rising debt load.

So, one lesson is we need to ensure advance planning and coordination so we can respond quickly and effectively to meet the challenges of the pandemic and other emergencies as they unfold. Another is that international cooperation is more important than ever before. Not just for dealing with the infection itself, but also to deal with the economic effects. Relating to your previous question – this is not just a catalyst for digital transformation – but also for international cooperation and political, economic and societal transformation with national, regional and global implications.

We also realize it is difficult to stimulate sufficiently with monetary policy alone, which is focused on liquidity and interest rates. The pandemic requires more careful targeting. That is because the negative impact is skewed toward service sectors such as travel, restaurants and entertainment and workers in these areas – while other areas such as cloud services, supermarkets and other industries benefit. Policies should be directed more specifically, including areas that lead to reform and I think that is important. This is not just our Japanese experience and our White Paper seeks to highlight how the pandemic provides opportunities that address important local as well as global issues through a careful, targeted approach.

Our firm has spent many years facilitating East Asian integration and trade and investment development for Japanese and other clients as well as other efforts in Southeast Asia to develop special economic zones and effective energy and infrastructure policies and planning. How do you view the importance and potential of Southeast Asia, both as an emerging market for goods and services and as a production platform and link within the global supply chain?  What advice can you give to firms and investors with an interest in this market?

Let me explain one interesting initiative METI is launching, called Asian Digital Transformation. Japan has long had good relations with its Asian neighbors. Many of these countries are undergoing very rapid deployment of digitalization and the societal and economic effects are enormous. Given they are starting from a lower base, in some cases the change is more rapid than what is occurring in Japan. This provides interesting economic opportunities as well as a catalyst for change in our own economy.

For example, Japanese companies and people can learn by interacting with our Asian neighbors. In the case of contact tracing, Southeast Asian government’s developed digital applications in cooperation with private companies and we can learn and facilitate these efforts by utilizing our networks and resources. This includes developing policies and guidelines that facilitate business activity and investment, regional development and integration, connecting Japanese funds, technologies and networks to encourage innovation and business activity within Southeast Asia. This is important, not just for their development but also for ours.

Since the end of the Second World War, the world has been guided by Bretton Woods institutions and a system that encouraged global coordination and led to free trade and prosperity. Over time it also led to the economic rise of nations who are now demanding a greater say. Modern technology, and the shift toward globalization, also introduced efficiencies and wealth – but resulted in more inequality, disparities, and concerns.

As a result, we are now experiencing a serious backlash and retreat from multilateralism toward more nationalist governments at a time when serious global problems, including the pandemic, climate change, technological standards, and other important issues that require a coordinated approach. What is your view of this problem and what steps can be taken to encourage global cooperation and to transform global institutions and systems to help guide us for the next 70+ years?

While the world is more connected than ever before, we are now facing a tough time when it comes to multilateralism. Last year marked the 75th anniversary of the post-war Bretton Woods agreements and divisive forces including growing distrust in international organizations, US withdrawal from the WHO, and Brexit, which are representative of a few of the many barriers that divide us. Nevertheless, improved global governance and cooperation is essential – with the pandemic being one of many issues we face – that does not respect national borders and requires a coordinated multilateral approach. It is also necessary to cope with other issues including inequality and vulnerable populations, food security and climate issues to name a few. I think Japan can help in that regard and we have been supporting the development of regional and bilateral trade agreements, and rules-based policies, not only in Asia but also in Europe, the US and other countries around the world.

This is not just about trade. Japan actively promotes global health at the United Nations, and while we realize it is a tough time for multilateralism we are determined not to give up and abandon it. With cooperation we can do a lot. For example, during the onset of the pandemic the US Federal Reserve provided liquidity to many countries with the support of the Bank of Japan other central banks and this helped to stabilize the markets. Without that cooperation the economic effects would have been far worse. Continuing cooperation now that the immediate panic has passed – to devise longer-term structures and solutions – is difficult though extremely important. We must recognize the world is far more integrated and bound than it was 75 years ago, and the role and importance of multilateralism is more important than ever before. In spite of the difficulties, however, I remain optimistic that we will find a way to deal with these pressures moving forward.

There is substantial potential for US and Japanese cooperation to strengthen supply chain resilience and to enter into other arrangements both between our governments and individual companies that allow closer cooperation, policy dialogue and innovation as well as profitable business arrangements and investments. How do you view the potential for US-Japanese government and private-sector cooperation? What areas are most suitable both globally as well as within third countries and the US and Japan?  

The US is our friend and ally. We share many values including democracy, liberty, freedom and dedication to a market economy, so I think our foundation is very strong and there is so much potential. Energy for example is one area worth highlighting. For example, there is already a program that has been developed called the Japan-US Strategic Energy Partnership (JUSEP), which provides cooperation to develop third-country infrastructure development. This has produced tangible developments including the Mekong Power Partnership, and in Vietnam, US and Japanese companies are working together on several sites that have been selected for development.

Another potential area of cooperation is in Latin America. We have not really explored this sufficiently, either as a market or a sourcing platform. In Brazil for example, Japanese and US companies are working together on digital infrastructure with Brazilian telecom companies. We also envision cooperation in Africa. This is a vast and challenging market with favorable demographics, which has huge potential both in terms of natural resources, supply chain management and growing consumer demand. US and Japanese companies have complementary characteristics. For example, US companies’ have knowledge and networking power in the region, while Japanese companies can provide strong manufacturing capabilities. As a result, this is a market where the US and Japan can work together.

India is also a major emerging economy. It is now hindered by the coronavirus – though over 200 Japanese companies have created investment plans which we think will go into effect as the danger recedes. There are so many opportunities there and in other developing countries around the world. This is a topic we address in the White Paper I mentioned. These are young markets, with favorable demographics, a range of resources, and substantial growth before them for decades to come.

The Japanese and US governments are also working together to develop guidelines and policies to set up global rules to deal with trade-distorting practices in third countries. These include subsidies to boost sectors that are not always the most efficient, such as non-market-oriented policies and practices that lead to severe overcapacity. One success we had in a recent trilateral trade ministers (EU, Japan and US) meeting was a proposal to strengthen rules concerning industrial subsidies and a basic structure for cooperation has pretty much been developed to address forced technology transfer and other important issues. This activity will be expanded over time between our nations. The trilateral group cooperate on WTO reforms and to multilateralize the proposals.

For many years in our research, we have separated international investment and business activities by those that focus on production and supply to third countries and those that emphasize consumption and demand.  What opportunities and investment themes do you think are most important for foreign companies in the new environment that is emerging in Asia around the world? What regions are most important and what should US and other companies understand when considering long-term opportunities and expansion plans outside their own economies, particularly in the developing world?

The developing world is extremely attractive and there are many growth opportunities as their living standards rise, creating strong demand and consumption within a young, rapidly expanding middle class. At the same time, one also should look at developed countries such as Japan. While growth rates may be low, developed countries are large and established. They also lead in technological and supply chain reconfiguration, as well as many other trends that are rapidly changing life and society all over the world.

In Japan itself, we have been transforming our economy over the past few decades without a lot of attention and there are many opportunities here. Much can be learned from our achievements. One strength that is rarely noticed is that female participation in the Japanese economy has been rising to unprecedented levels. In many ways, it exceeds that of the US. For example, according to OECD, Japan’s female labor force participation rate was 72.6 percent, and that of the US was 68.9 percent in 2019.

In addition to investment, these developments have important societal and political implications. In Japan, for example, we can contribute to the discussion of how to adapt to an aging society including healthcare and related issues. This provides many opportunities for US and foreign firms, both within Japan as well as in adopting our approaches within their own economies. Another issue is payment systems. Japan aims to double the digital payment rate until 2025. When the additional consumption tax was introduced last October, METI devised a digital rebate program to offset the impact and promote cashless payments.

Although the rebate program ended this June, more people are now willing to use electric payments. We also lag in other industries and the development of important services. This is a real opportunity for US and foreign companies who have expertise in disruptive new services utilizing digital technology and an interest in introducing them to Japan.

Japan was an early leader on the climate change issue, organizing the Kyoto Protocol meetings which ultimately led to the 2015 Paris Agreement that seek to keep increases in global average temperature to well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels. While international coordination has been difficult, particularly after the 2017 US withdrawal under President Trump, the pandemic has actually at least temporarily caused a global reduction of carbon emissions. There is also more emphasis on renewable energy and some advocate shifting more toward nuclear as a clean energy source. What is the potential effect of the pandemic on climate change discussions?

The pandemic has shown how many challenges remain in terms of climate change and other complicated global issues. While there have been short term benefits as industrial activities recede and production is suspended, over time this will come back if we do not develop long term solutions.

I think the pandemic has made it clear and allowed us to recognize how vulnerable global society is if we do not pay attention and react carefully in a coordinated way. We cannot simply deny the existence of problems and develop piecemeal solutions. In many ways the challenges of addressing the spread of the virus and climate change are the same – though the virus is occurring at a faster rate – so it is more visible and showcases the issue. These are global challenges and to effectively contain, resolve and manage these problems – in an age where we are so connected through supply chains, travel and technology – we need a global and coordinated approach.

In that sense, while the spread of the pandemic has been a real tragedy, we hope that ultimately it will serve as a positive influence serving as a catalyst for stronger international cooperation not only on climate change but the whole range of important issues we face today.

Thank you, Mr. Tashiro, for your time and attention. Look forward to speaking again soon!

_______________________________________________________________

To read previously released articles in the series, click the links below:

Global Trade Talk: Navigating Geopolitical Currents in a Changing Southeast Asia

Global Trade Talk: Enhancing US-Korea Trade and Investment Cooperation in a Changing World Environment

Global Trade Talk: Reconfiguring US-China Supply Chains for a Post-Coronavirus World

Keith Rabin serves as President at KWR International, Inc., a global consulting firm specializing in international market entry; trade, business, investment and economic development; site location, as well as research and public relations/ public affairs services for a wide range of corporate and government clients.

cider

Global Cider, Perry, and Mead Market – South Africa Has Overtaken South Korea as the World’s Largest Exporter

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘World – Cider, Perry, Mead And Other Fermented Beverages – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends And Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

South Africa has overtaken South Korea as the world’s largest exporter of cider, perry, mead and other fermented beverages. In 2018, shipments from each country amounted to approximately 108 million liters. South Korea has long been a world leader in cider exports, but its supply has been rapidly declining, and as a result, it has halved over the past five years. In contrast, South Africa, by offering products at the lowest prices, increased its shipments to other countries.

Global Trade of Cider, Perry, and Mead 2014-2018

In 2018, approx. 1.1B litres of cider, perry, mead and other fermented beverages were exported worldwide; coming down by -2.8% against the previous year. Over the period under review, cider, perry and mead exports continue to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2017 when exports increased by 0.7% y-o-y. In that year, global cider, perry and mead exports reached their peak of 1.2B litres, and then declined slightly in the following year.

In value terms, cider, perry and mead exports stood at $1.5B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018.

Exports by Country

The countries with the highest levels of cider, perry and mead exports in 2018 were South Africa (108M litres), South Korea (108M litres), Sweden (102M litres), Germany (76M litres), Ireland (73M litres), the UK (66M litres), Belgium (59M litres), the Netherlands (53M litres), France (44M litres), Italy (41M litres), Lithuania (37M litres) and Japan (36M litres), together accounting for 71% of total export.

From 2014 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of exports, amongst the main exporting countries, was attained by the UK, while exports for the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, the largest cider, perry and mead supplying countries worldwide were Japan ($210M), Sweden ($134M) and Italy ($112M), with a combined 30% share of global exports.

Among the main exporting countries, Japan recorded the highest rates of growth with regard to the value of exports, over the period under review, while exports for the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Export Prices by Country

In 2018, the average cider, perry and mead export price amounted to $1.3 per litre, growing by 7.8% against the previous year.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of origin; the country with the highest price was Japan ($5.8 per litre), while South Africa ($0.6 per litre) was amongst the lowest.

From 2014 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by Japan, while the other global leaders experienced mixed trends in the export price figures.

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

global trade

Global Trade: 2019 Wrap-Up and 2020 Forecast

Looking back at this year, 2019 saw a multitude of global economic growth disruptors from the escalation of the trade war between the U.S. and China, to Germany’s manufacturing and automotive decline and Brexit.

Consequentially, global trade growth has almost come to a standstill, and while it’s not quite at recession levels, nearly every market and sector, as well as businesses within those sectors, have felt the impact of policies and decision making.

Even with the possibility that trade growth could rebound in 2020 to a modest 1.5%, economic policy uncertainty remains high and if it abates, it is likely only to do so to a limited extent into 2020. What factors are at play? Let’s take a look.

Trade war with China. Despite the recent conclusion of ‘phase one’ of a U.S.-China trade deal, uncertainty remains high. The underlying reason for the trade war is not resolved and is unlikely to be resolved soon either: it regards fundamental issues such as the influence of China on the global economy and theft of intellectual property. Although tensions may temporarily soften, as they seem to do now, we see no end in sight for the trade war with China and with the current administration in the White House for one more year, another rocky year is forecasted. The trade war alone is affecting no more than almost 3% of global trade — currently approximately $550 billion of goods — but it is sending a ripple effect around the globe from business investment to value chains and trade flows. If it expands to other economies in Asia and Europe, which is very possible, we could see an even more pronounced slowing in trade.

Brexit. The self-imposed economic hardship has caused much uncertainty and plummeting fixed investments in the business sector. With Boris Johnson elected to Prime Minister in the December election and Brexit a certainty come January 31, policy uncertainty has been lessened, but some will remain until a new trade relationship with the EU is shaped. While the clout of those favoring a no-deal Brexit has been diminished, a no-deal Brexit is still possible. If this occurs, it would throw chaos into supply chains across Europe.

Business insolvencies and market pressure. The U.S. is expected to lead the number of business insolvencies with a 3.9% increase in 2020, far above the global average of 2.6% expected next year. This is due to the fact that there’s been lower business investment, lower external demand (especially from China), and higher import and labor costs. Those sectors feeling the most pressure include steel, which is dealing with an overcapacity issue, automotive, and businesses dealing in aircraft, which have seen a 20% market share loss. U.S. businesses dealing in vegetable and animal products and agriculture won’t see any relief soon either, and all U.S. businesses that have typically relied on imports from China (as well as businesses in China relying on imports from the U.S.) are now facing higher costs, which are resulting in insolvencies.

Despite all the economic doom and gloom, there are a few bright spots. Indeed, the ‘phase one’ agreement between the U.S. and China provides at least hope. Moreover, the U.S. signed trade agreements with Japan, Canada, and Mexico, and a few countries, like India and China, which are pulling their weight with a 6% GDP growth rate, are providing some positive impact on the global figure as they continue to grow at rapid pace, that is to say above 5% per annum.

Further, the consumer outlook looks positive with household consumption in both North America and Europe ending on a high note, thanks to low unemployment. Unfortunately, this alone cannot support economic growth. Low-interest rates and the amount of money floating around the U.S. as well as Europe could give rise to turmoil in the markets and the economy – both pillars of global growth – and any detriment to consumer confidence could put the economy in a downward spiral, reversing the modest growth expectations set for 2020.

There is much at stake and a low likelihood of that changing for 2020. If economic and political developments continue to sour, economic growth could be hampered even more than it already is.

__________________________________________________________________

John Lorié is Chief Economist at Atradius Credit Insurance, having joined the company in April 2011. He is also affiliated to the University of Amsterdam as a researcher. Previously, he was Senior Vice President at ABN AMRO, where he worked for more than 20 years in a variety of roles. He started his career in the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs. John holds a PHD in international economics, masters’ degrees in economics (honours) and tax economics as well as a bachelor’s degree in marketing.

orange juice

Global Concentrated Orange Juice Market – Brazil Strengthened Its Position as the World’s Leading Exporter

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘World – Concentrated Orange Juice – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends and Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The global concentrated orange juice market revenue amounted to $4B in 2018, growing by 6.1% against the previous year. This figure reflects the total revenues of producers and importers (excluding logistics costs, retail marketing costs, and retailers’ margins, which will be included in the final consumer price). The market value increased at an average annual rate of +1.5% from 2008 to 2018; the trend pattern remained relatively stable, with somewhat noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. The global concentrated orange juice market peaked in 2018 and is likely to continue its growth in the near future.

Consumption By Country

The countries with the highest volumes of concentrated orange juice consumption in 2018 were Brazil (674K tonnes), the U.S. (656K tonnes) and France (141K tonnes), with a combined 62% share of global consumption. The UK, Belgium, the Netherlands, Japan, Spain and Ireland lagged somewhat behind, together accounting for a further 18%.

From 2008 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of concentrated orange juice consumption, amongst the main consuming countries, was attained by Japan, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, the U.S. ($1.4B), Brazil ($1.1B) and France ($218M) were the countries with the highest levels of market value in 2018, together accounting for 69% of the global market. These countries were followed by the Netherlands, Belgium, Japan, the UK, Ireland and Spain, which together accounted for a further 16%.

The countries with the highest levels of concentrated orange juice per capita consumption in 2018 were Belgium (8,445 kg per 1000 persons), Ireland (7,486 kg per 1000 persons) and the Netherlands (5,039 kg per 1000 persons).

From 2008 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of concentrated orange juice per capita consumption, amongst the main consuming countries, was attained by Japan, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Market Forecast 2019-2025

Driven by rising demand for concentrated orange juice worldwide, the market is expected to start an upward consumption trend over the next seven years. The performance of the market is forecast to increase slightly, with an anticipated CAGR of +0.6% for the seven-year period from 2018 to 2025, which is projected to bring the market volume to 2.5M tonnes by the end of 2025.

Production 2007-2018

In 2018, the amount of concentrated orange juice produced worldwide totaled 2.2M tonnes, rising by 6% against the previous year. The total output volume increased at an average annual rate of +1.8% over the period from 2008 to 2018; the trend pattern remained consistent, with only minor fluctuations being observed throughout the analyzed period. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2009 with an increase of 8.3% against the previous year. Over the period under review, global concentrated orange juice production reached its peak figure volume in 2018 and is expected to retain its growth in the immediate term.

In value terms, concentrated orange juice production amounted to $3.4B in 2018 estimated in export prices. In general, the total output indicated a perceptible expansion from 2008 to 2018: its value increased at an average annual rate of +1.8% over the last decade. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, concentrated orange juice production increased by +19.1% against 2016 indices. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2012 when production volume increased by 53% against the previous year. Over the period under review, global concentrated orange juice production reached its maximum level at $3.5B in 2017, and then declined slightly in the following year.

Production By Country

Brazil (1.1M tonnes) constituted the country with the largest volume of concentrated orange juice production, accounting for 49% of total production. Moreover, concentrated orange juice production in Brazil exceeded the figures recorded by the world’s second-largest producer, the U.S. (413K tonnes), threefold. The third position in this ranking was occupied by Mexico (137K tonnes), with a 6.4% share.

In Brazil, concentrated orange juice production expanded at an average annual rate of +3.1% over the period from 2008-2018. The remaining producing countries recorded the following average annual rates of production growth: the U.S. (+0.7% per year) and Mexico (+16.9% per year).

Exports 2007-2018

Global exports totaled 1.3M tonnes in 2018, growing by 16% against the previous year. In general, concentrated orange juice exports, however, continue to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2018 when exports increased by 16% y-o-y. Over the period under review, global concentrated orange juice exports attained their peak figure at 1.6M tonnes in 2009; however, from 2010 to 2018, exports stood at a somewhat lower figure.

In value terms, concentrated orange juice exports amounted to $2B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. In general, concentrated orange juice exports, however, continue to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2010 when exports increased by 11% y-o-y. The global exports peaked at $2.3B in 2011; however, from 2012 to 2018, exports remained at a lower figure.

Exports by Country

Brazil was the largest exporting country with an export of about 381K tonnes, which amounted to 30% of total exports. Belgium (146K tonnes) occupied a 12% share (based on tonnes) of total exports, which put it in second place, followed by the Netherlands (12%), Mexico (11%), Costa Rica (9.4%) and Germany (5.2%). The following exporters – Spain (31K tonnes), South Africa (25K tonnes), the UK (22K tonnes), Thailand (20K tonnes) and the U.S. (20K tonnes) – each finished at a 9.4% share of total exports.

From 2008 to 2018, average annual rates of growth with regard to concentrated orange juice exports from Brazil stood at +1.1%. At the same time, Mexico (+29.4%), Costa Rica (+16.4%), South Africa (+9.4%), the UK (+7.3%) and Thailand (+1.6%) displayed positive paces of growth. Moreover, Mexico emerged as the fastest-growing exporter in the world, with a CAGR of +29.4% from 2008-2018. By contrast, the Netherlands (-1.4%), Germany (-4.0%), the U.S. (-4.0%), Spain (-6.6%) and Belgium (-9.5%) illustrated a downward trend over the same period. From 2008 to 2018, the share of Mexico, Costa Rica and Brazil increased by +9.9%, +7.4% and +3% percentage points, while the Netherlands (-1.7 p.p.), Spain (-2.5 p.p.), Germany (-2.6 p.p.) and Belgium (-19.9 p.p.) saw their share reduced. The shares of the other countries remained relatively stable throughout the analyzed period.

In value terms, the largest concentrated orange juice markets worldwide were Brazil ($706M), Belgium ($418M) and the Netherlands ($358M), together accounting for 74% of global exports. Germany, Costa Rica, Mexico, the U.S., Spain, South Africa, the UK and Thailand lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 18%.

Mexico recorded the highest rates of growth with regard to exports, among the main exporting countries over the last decade, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Export Prices by Country

The average concentrated orange juice export price stood at $1,593 per tonne in 2018, declining by -6.4% against the previous year. Over the period under review, the concentrated orange juice export price, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2011 an increase of 28% year-to-year. In that year, the average export prices for concentrated orange juice attained their peak level of $1,744 per tonne. From 2012 to 2018, the growth in terms of the average export prices for concentrated orange juice remained at a lower figure.

There were significant differences in the average prices amongst the major exporting countries. In 2018, the country with the highest price was Belgium ($2,855 per tonne), while Mexico ($418 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2008 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by Belgium, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Imports 2007-2018

In 2018, approx. 1.5M tonnes of concentrated orange juice were imported worldwide; jumping by 17% against the previous year. Over the period under review, concentrated orange juice imports, however, continue to indicate a measured deduction. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2018 when imports increased by 17% year-to-year. Over the period under review, global concentrated orange juice imports attained their maximum at 2M tonnes in 2008; however, from 2009 to 2018, imports remained at a lower figure.

In value terms, concentrated orange juice imports stood at $2.3B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. In general, concentrated orange juice imports, however, continue to indicate a measured drop. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2011 with an increase of 23% against the previous year. The global imports peaked at $2.8B in 2008; however, from 2009 to 2018, imports remained at a lower figure.

Imports by Country

The countries with the highest levels of concentrated orange juice imports in 2018 were the U.S. (263K tonnes), the Netherlands (231K tonnes), Belgium (190K tonnes), France (142K tonnes), the UK (122K tonnes) and Germany (101K tonnes), together amounting to 71% of total import. The following importers – Japan (51K tonnes), Spain (44K tonnes), Ireland (41K tonnes) and Poland (35K tonnes) – together made up 11% of total imports.

From 2008 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of imports, amongst the main importing countries, was attained by Japan, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, the Netherlands ($471M), Belgium ($347M) and Germany ($227M) constituted the countries with the highest levels of imports in 2018, with a combined 46% share of global imports. These countries were followed by the UK, France, the U.S., Japan, Spain, Poland and Ireland, which together accounted for a further 37%.

Among the main importing countries, Japan experienced the highest growth rate of imports, over the last decade, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Import Prices by Country

In 2018, the average concentrated orange juice import price amounted to $1,523 per tonne, coming down by -6.1% against the previous year. In general, the concentrated orange juice import price, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2011 when the average import price increased by 28% against the previous year. In that year, the average import prices for concentrated orange juice attained their peak level of $1,625 per tonne. From 2012 to 2018, the growth in terms of the average import prices for concentrated orange juice failed to regain its momentum.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of destination; the country with the highest price was Spain ($2,496 per tonne), while the U.S. ($450 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2008 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by Spain, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

Japan

Japan Mini-Deal A Victory for U.S. Agriculture?

Many American farmers and ranchers breathed a sigh of relief when the United States and Japan formally signed a U.S.-Japan Trade Agreement in September. Billed as the first phase of a more comprehensive trade deal, the Agreement establishes standards to promote digital trade and provides Japanese exporters with improved market access for certain industrial products. In return, Japan agreed to slash tariffs on a wide range of food and agriculture exports – a key outcome for the U.S. agriculture community.

For U.S. agriculture producers struggling with a weak farm economy and uncertainty in global markets, implementation of the Agreement cannot come soon enough. Japan consistently ranks as one of the top export markets for agriculture and food, soaking up over $14.5 billion worth of goods in 2018. But farm groups have been ringing alarm bells ever since the United States withdrew from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) that would have provided them access to the Japanese market sooner.

Japan top market for U.S. beef

U.S. competitors get a head start

Walking away from the TPP meant that U.S. producers were not eligible to enjoy the tariff cuts Japan adopted under that agreement. Instead, the benefits of improved market access flowed to key U.S. competitors, including from Canada, Australia and New Zealand, as those countries remained under the TPP framework. On top of that, the European Union (EU) landed its own trade deal with Japan that provided European farmers and ranchers with favorable export terms. Taken together, these various agreements put the United States at a serious disadvantage. While Japanese tariffs on foreign agricultural products continued to fall, the United States was stuck paying higher tariff rates, raising the overall cost of U.S. exports relative to competitors.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture captured this dynamic in a report it released late last year on beef exports to Japan. Without a trade agreement, U.S. beef exporters were forced to pay the “Most Favored Nation (MFN)” applied tariff rate of 38.5 percent. Not only were the tariffs paid by European beef exporters (“JAEPA” in the chart below) and by members of the TPP (“CPTPP” in the chart) considerably lower, the tariffs are scheduled to continue dropping over the next 15 years. The widening gap would render U.S. products even less attractive with each passing year.

Japan tariff reduction schedule for beef chart

U.S. strikes a “mini-deal” to catch up

Recognizing the dangers for beef and other U.S. agricultural commodities facing a similar future, the Trump Administration moved to strike a partial free trade agreement with Japan that would level the playing field for U.S. products. Stage one of the U.S.-Japan Trade Agreement mostly achieves that goal by lowering the tariff rates Japan applies to over 90 percent of U.S. agricultural goods, seeking to match Japan’s commitments under TPP.

However, U.S. agricultural producers are not completely out of the woods. That is because the TPP – like most modern trade agreements – included more than just tariff reductions. It also covered a broad range of regulations impacting agricultural trade including customs procedures and product safety approvals. The United States and Japan did not address these so-called “technical barriers to trade” in the first phase of their bilateral agreement.

Awaiting “stage two”

Both U.S. President Trump and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe have committed to working towards a more comprehensive agreement. The Administration’s U.S.-Japan bilateral negotiating objectives outline goals for every sector of the economy. That should give hope to U.S. agriculture groups, especially rice growers and dairy producers who are still seeking improved market access to Japan. U.S. industrial goods manufacturers, many of whom are eyeing the Japanese market, will be just as eager to see a comprehensive deal in the near future.

U.S. agricultural products left out of Japan mini-deal

The obvious risk is that a comprehensive deal never materializes. The annals of history (and recent memories) are filled with examples of derailed international negotiations. A pending U.S. decision on whether to impose tariffs on Japanese automobiles and parts, for example, could easily send the trade winds blowing in another direction. In addition to disappointing U.S. business groups, failure to land a full agreement could run afoul of World Trade Organization (WTO) rules, which plainly state that trade agreements must cover “substantially all trade.”

Nonetheless, after the year farmers have had, the initial U.S.-Japan Trade Agreement is still a deal worth celebrating.

________________________________________________________________

 

Max Moncaster is an Associate Director at the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture, where he focuses on trade and natural resource issues. He has served in trade policy and advocacy roles for public and private sector organizations since 2014.

This article originally appeared on TradeVistas.org. Republished with permission.

 

beeswax

Asia’s Beeswax Market Is Estimated at $206M in 2018, an Increase of 3.4%

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘Asia – Beeswax – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends and Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The revenue of the beeswax market in Asia amounted to $206M in 2018, increasing by 3.4% against the previous year. This figure reflects the total revenues of producers and importers (excluding logistics costs, retail marketing costs, and retailers’ margins, which will be included in the final consumer price). The total market indicated a moderate increase from 2007 to 2018: its value increased at an average annual rate of +0.7% over the last eleven years.

Consumption By Country in Asia

The country with the largest volume of beeswax consumption was India (26K tonnes), accounting for 64% of total consumption. Moreover, beeswax consumption in India exceeded the figures recorded by the region’s second-largest consumer, Turkey (4.9K tonnes), fivefold. The third position in this ranking was occupied by South Korea (3.7K tonnes), with a 9.1% share.

In India, beeswax consumption expanded at an average annual rate of +2.6% over the period from 2007-2018. In the other countries, the average annual rates were as follows: Turkey (+1.9% per year) and South Korea (-1.1% per year).

In value terms, India ($127M) led the market, alone. The second position in the ranking was occupied by Turkey ($42M). It was followed by South Korea.

The countries with the highest levels of beeswax per capita consumption in 2018 were South Korea (73 kg per 1000 persons), Turkey (59 kg per 1000 persons) and Malaysia (39 kg per 1000 persons).

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of beeswax per capita consumption, amongst the main consuming countries, was attained by Japan, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Market Forecast 2019-2025 in Asia

Driven by increasing demand for beeswax in Asia, the market is expected to continue an upward consumption trend over the next seven-year period. Market performance is forecast to retain its current trend pattern, expanding with an anticipated CAGR of +0.2% for the seven-year period from 2018 to 2025, which is projected to bring the market volume to 42K tonnes by the end of 2025.

Production in Asia

In 2018, approx. 50K tonnes of beeswax were produced in Asia; remaining stable against the previous year. The total output volume increased at an average annual rate of +1.3% from 2007 to 2018; the trend pattern remained consistent, with only minor fluctuations being recorded in certain years. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2008 when production volume increased by 5.6% against the previous year. Over the period under review, beeswax production reached its peak figure volume in 2018 and is likely to continue its growth in the immediate term.

In value terms, beeswax production stood at $292M in 2018 estimated in export prices. Over the period under review, beeswax production continues to indicate prominent growth. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2011 with an increase of 25% against the previous year. Over the period under review, beeswax production attained its peak figure level at $392M in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, production failed to regain its momentum.

Production By Country in Asia

India (24K tonnes) remains the largest beeswax producing country in Asia, comprising approx. 49% of total production. Moreover, beeswax production in India exceeded the figures recorded by the region’s second-largest producer, China (11K tonnes), twofold. Turkey (4.5K tonnes) ranked third in terms of total production with a 9% share.

In India, beeswax production increased at an average annual rate of +2.0% over the period from 2007-2018. In the other countries, the average annual rates were as follows: China (+0.5% per year) and Turkey (+1.4% per year).

Exports in Asia

The exports totaled 14K tonnes in 2018, surging by 8.1% against the previous year. The total exports indicated a strong increase from 2007 to 2018: its volume increased at an average annual rate of +6.7% over the last eleven-year period. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, beeswax exports increased by +9.1% against 2016 indices. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2010 when exports increased by 26% year-to-year. The volume of exports peaked in 2018 and are expected to retain its growth in the near future.

In value terms, beeswax exports amounted to $79M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. In general, beeswax exports continue to indicate a resilient expansion. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2010 with an increase of 34% y-o-y. The level of exports peaked at $80M in 2015; however, from 2016 to 2018, exports stood at a somewhat lower figure.

Exports by Country

In 2018, China (9.7K tonnes) represented the major exporter of beeswax, committing 69% of total exports. It was distantly followed by Malaysia (1,970 tonnes) and Viet Nam (1,494 tonnes), together committing a 25% share of total exports. India (339 tonnes) held a little share of total exports.

Exports from China increased at an average annual rate of +5.3% from 2007 to 2018. At the same time, Viet Nam (+19.6%), India (+15.2%) and Malaysia (+8.8%) displayed positive paces of growth. Moreover, Viet Nam emerged as the fastest-growing exporter in Asia, with a CAGR of +19.6% from 2007-2018. China (+30 p.p.), Viet Nam (+9.2 p.p.), Malaysia (+8.5 p.p.) and India (+1.9 p.p.) significantly strengthened its position in terms of the total exports, while the shares of the other countries remained relatively stable throughout the analyzed period.

In value terms, China ($61M) remains the largest beeswax supplier in Asia, comprising 77% of total beeswax exports. The second position in the ranking was occupied by Viet Nam ($12M), with a 15% share of total exports. It was followed by India, with a 2% share.

From 2007 to 2018, the average annual rate of growth in terms of value in China stood at +10.9%. In the other countries, the average annual rates were as follows: Viet Nam (+24.8% per year) and India (+15.5% per year).

Export Prices by Country

The beeswax export price in Asia stood at $5,595 per tonne in 2018, going up by 1.8% against the previous year. The export price indicated a buoyant increase from 2007 to 2018: its price increased at an average annual rate of +4.4% over the last eleven-year period. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, beeswax export price decreased by -5.3% against 2015 indices. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2012 when the export price increased by 20% y-o-y. Over the period under review, the export prices for beeswax reached their maximum at $5,910 per tonne in 2015; however, from 2016 to 2018, export prices failed to regain their momentum.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of origin; the country with the highest price was Viet Nam ($7,731 per tonne), while Malaysia ($670 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by China, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Imports in Asia

In 2018, approx. 5.5K tonnes of beeswax were imported in Asia; stabilizing at the previous year. Overall, beeswax imports continue to indicate remarkable growth. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2010 when imports increased by 40% against the previous year. The volume of imports peaked in 2018 and are likely to see steady growth in the near future.

In value terms, beeswax imports totaled $28M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. In general, beeswax imports continue to indicate a prominent increase. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2010 when imports increased by 47% year-to-year. Over the period under review, beeswax imports reached their maximum in 2018 and are expected to retain its growth in the immediate term.

Imports by Country

India represented the major importing country with an import of around 2.2K tonnes, which resulted at 40% of total imports. Japan (889 tonnes) took the second position in the ranking, followed by China (557 tonnes), Turkey (405 tonnes) and South Korea (357 tonnes). All these countries together took approx. 40% share of total imports. Pakistan (186 tonnes), Thailand (181 tonnes) and Taiwan, Chinese (93 tonnes) followed a long way behind the leaders.

India was also the fastest-growing in terms of the beeswax imports, with a CAGR of +23.1% from 2007 to 2018. At the same time, China (+20.6%), Pakistan (+14.2%), Turkey (+9.8%), Thailand (+5.9%) and Taiwan, Chinese (+1.8%) displayed positive paces of growth. Japan experienced a relatively flat trend pattern. By contrast, South Korea (-2.4%) illustrated a downward trend over the same period. India (+36 p.p.), China (+8.9 p.p.), Turkey (+4.7 p.p.), Pakistan (+2.6 p.p.), Japan (+1.6 p.p.) and Thailand (+1.5 p.p.) significantly strengthened its position in terms of the total imports, while South Korea saw its share reduced by -2% from 2007 to 2018, respectively. The shares of the other countries remained relatively stable throughout the analyzed period.

In value terms, the largest beeswax importing markets in Asia were Japan ($8.2M), China ($5.5M) and South Korea ($2.9M), with a combined 60% share of total imports.

China recorded the highest growth rate of imports, among the main importing countries over the last eleven years, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Import Prices by Country

The beeswax import price in Asia stood at $5,033 per tonne in 2018, remaining stable against the previous year. Over the last eleven years, it increased at an average annual rate of +1.5%. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2014 when the import price increased by 35% y-o-y. In that year, the import prices for beeswax attained their peak level of $5,431 per tonne. From 2015 to 2018, the growth in terms of the import prices for beeswax remained at a lower figure.

There were significant differences in the average prices amongst the major importing countries. In 2018, the country with the highest price was China ($9,919 per tonne), while India ($1,098 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by South Korea, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

Global Beef Market 2019 – Rising Demand In China Boosts Imports Up, Securing New Opportunities For Foreign Suppliers

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘World – Beef (Cattle Meat) – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends and Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The global beef market revenue amounted to $385.7B in 2018, growing by 5.1% against the previous year. This figure reflects the total revenues of producers and importers (excluding logistics costs, retail marketing costs, and retailers’ margins, which will be included in the final consumer price). The market value increased at an average annual rate of +3.2% over the period from 2007 to 2018; the trend pattern remained consistent, with somewhat noticeable fluctuations throughout the analyzed period. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2008 with an increase of 11% year-to-year. Global beef consumption peaked in 2018 and is expected to retain its growth in the near future.

Production 2007-2018

In 2018, approx. 70M tonnes of beef (cattle meat) were produced worldwide; flattening at the previous year. In general, beef production continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2013 when Production Volume increased by 1.8% against the previous year. Over the period under review, global beef production reached its peak figure volume in 2018 and is likely to continue its growth in the immediate term. The general positive trend in terms of beef output was largely conditioned by a relatively flat trend pattern of the number of producing animals and a relatively flat trend pattern in yield figures.

In value terms, beef production stood at $392.3B in 2018 estimated in export prices. The total output value increased at an average annual rate of +4.3% over the period from 2007 to 2018; the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2008 with an increase of 19% y-o-y. Global beef production peaked in 2018 and is likely to see steady growth in the immediate term.

Exports 2007-2018

In 2018, approx. 8.1M tonnes of beef (cattle meat) were exported worldwide; approximately equating the previous year. The total export volume increased at an average annual rate of +1.6% over the period from 2007 to 2018; the trend pattern remained consistent, with only minor fluctuations being observed throughout the analyzed period. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2013 with an increase of 10% against the previous year. Over the period under review, global beef exports attained their peak figure at 8.2M tonnes in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, exports failed to regain their momentum.

In value terms, beef exports amounted to $40.7B in 2018. In general, the total exports indicated a resilient increase from 2007 to 2018: its value increased at an average annual rate of +1.6% over the last eleven year period. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, the beef exports increased by +6.0% against 2016 indices. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2008 with an increase of 18% against the previous year. Over the period under review, global beef exports attained their maximum at $44.1B in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, exports stood at a somewhat lower figure.

Exports by Country

In 2018, Brazil (1.3M tonnes), followed by Australia (857K tonnes), the U.S. (691K tonnes), New Zealand (436K tonnes), Ireland (410K tonnes), the Netherlands (383K tonnes) and Argentina (367K tonnes) were the major exporters of beef (cattle meat), together mixing up 55% of total exports. Canada (345K tonnes), India (337K tonnes), Poland (325K tonnes), Uruguay (283K tonnes) and Germany (266K tonnes) took a relatively small share of total exports.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of exports, amongst the main exporting countries, was attained by Poland, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, the largest beef markets worldwide were Brazil ($5.3B), the U.S. ($4.8B) and Australia ($4.7B), together comprising 36% of global exports. Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Argentina, Canada, Uruguay, Poland, Germany and India lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 40%.

In terms of the main exporting countries, Poland experienced the highest rates of growth with regard to exports, over the last eleven year period, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Export Prices by Country

In 2018, the average beef export price amounted to $5,052 per tonne, leveling off at the previous year. Over the period from 2007 to 2018, it increased at an average annual rate of +2.3%. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2008 when the average export price increased by 20% year-to-year. Over the period under review, the average export prices for beef (cattle meat) attained their maximum at $5,370 per tonne in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, export prices remained at a lower figure.

There were significant differences in the average Export Price prices amongst the major exporting countries. In 2018, the country with the highest Export Price price was the U.S. ($6,894 per tonne), while India ($3,448 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of Export Price prices was attained by India, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Imports 2007-2018

In 2018, the global imports of beef (cattle meat) stood at 9.5M tonnes, increasing by 4.3% against the previous year. The total import volume increased at an average annual rate of +2.3% over the period from 2007 to 2018; the trend pattern remained consistent, with only minor fluctuations being recorded in certain years. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2013 with an increase of 7.4% year-to-year. Global imports peaked in 2018 and are expected to retain its growth in the near future.

In value terms, beef imports totaled $47.3B in 2018. Overall, the total imports indicated a remarkable increase from 2007 to 2018: its value increased at an average annual rate of +2.3% over the last eleven year period. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, the beef imports increased by +15.4% against 2016 indices. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2011 when Imports increased by 16% year-to-year. Over the period under review, global beef imports reached their maximum in 2018 and are expected to retain its growth in the immediate term.

Imports by Country

In 2018, China (1M tonnes), the U.S. (912K tonnes), Viet Nam (619K tonnes), Japan (610K tonnes), South Korea (442K tonnes), China, Hong Kong SAR (439K tonnes), Italy (386K tonnes), Germany (367K tonnes), Russia (359K tonnes), the Netherlands (356K tonnes), the UK (294K tonnes) and France (247K tonnes) represented the largest importers of beef (cattle meat) in the world, mixing up 64% of total import.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of imports, amongst the main importing countries, was attained by China, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, the largest beef importing markets worldwide were the U.S. ($5B), China ($4.7B) and Japan ($3.5B), together accounting for 28% of global imports.

China recorded the highest growth rate of imports, in terms of the main importing countries over the last eleven years, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Import Prices by Country

In 2018, the average beef import price amounted to $4,996 per tonne, increasing by 2.2% against the previous year. Over the period from 2007 to 2018, it increased at an average annual rate of +2.3%. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2008 an increase of 18% year-to-year. Global import price peaked at $5,104 per tonne in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, import prices failed to regain their momentum.

There were significant differences in the average Import Price prices amongst the major importing countries. In 2018, the country with the highest Import Price price was South Korea ($6,415 per tonne), while Viet Nam ($3,258 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of Import Price prices was attained by the U.S., while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

Economic Partnership Agreement Confirmed for EU & Japan

The EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement and the EU-Japan Strategic Partnership Agreement were approved earlier this month, highlighting for the first time details surrounding the Paris climate agreement and covering over one third of the global GDP, according to a release announcing the agreement confirmation. The agreements are part of the overall goal of creating an open trading zone as well as fostering a faster and simplified trade environment in the EU region. The agreement is scheduled to take effect February 1, 2019.

Japan is a country with which we already work very closely. Following today’s votes, our partnership will become even stronger. Japan is an important partner for the EU in multilateral fora. Our new agreement will help us cooperate even more closely in many areas and increase people-to-people contacts,” said High Representative Federica Mogherini.

Products impacted by the agreement include Gouda/Cheddar cheese as well as wine exports, which will see the elimination of duties. Other products such as cosmetics, chemicals, textiles and clothing will also see the removal of tariffs in the competitive EU regions.

“Almost five centuries after Europeans established the first trade ties with Japan, the entry into force of the EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement will bring our trade, political and strategic relationship to a whole new level,” President of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker said. “I praise the European Parliament for today’s vote that reinforces Europe’s unequivocal message: together with close partners and friends like Japan we will continue to defend open, win-win and rules-based trade. And more than words or intentions, this agreement will deliver significant and tangible benefits for companies and citizens in Europe and Japan.”

 

Source: EIN Presswire