New Articles

Asia’s Beef Market 2020 – Positive Outlook for China, Negative Expectations for India

asia

Asia’s Beef Market 2020 – Positive Outlook for China, Negative Expectations for India

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

The coronavirus pandemic continues to negatively impact the Asian beef market, holding back production and international trade. However, it can be predicted that the strength of the impact will depend on how quickly countries return to normalcy. In China, which was the first to recover from the pandemic, positive dynamics are expected in the second half of the year. In contrast, India, the second-largest beef producer after China, will face significant losses in production and exports.

The expected increase in China’s beef production is driven by rising cattle herds, particularly on large farms, and strong domestic demand to offset the ongoing pork shortage. In addition, China will continue to increase its imports, fueled by new accreditations granted to meatpacking plants in Brazil, Argentina, and Uruguay, as well as new trade agreements with these countries.

In India, cattle production may be reduced due to a pandemic shutdown, especially since collection of animals is usually carried out in the form of home visits. Given that most of the production is destined for foreign markets, slowing economic growth in many countries could further undermine the Indian cattle sector.

Import growth is likely to slow in almost all other Asian markets, as widespread recession restricts consumption in middle- and low-income households, while restrictions and physical distancing reduce restaurant turnover, dampening demand for high-quality meat products.

Beef Consumption by Country in Asia

China (7.5M tonnes) continues to be the largest cattle meat market in Asia, accounting for 35% of the total volume. Moreover, beef consumption in China exceeded the figures recorded by the second-largest consumer, Pakistan (1.9M tonnes), fourfold. India (1.5M tonnes) ranked third in terms of total consumption with a 7.1% share.

From 2009 to 2019, the average annual growth rate of beef consumption in Сhina was +1.5%. Pakistan enjoys the highest growth (+3.2% per year), while India suffers from decreasing demand (-2.8% per year).

In value terms, China ($93.3B) led the market, alone. The second position in the ranking was occupied by Turkey ($7.5B). It was followed by Pakistan.

The countries with the highest levels of beef per capita consumption in 2019 were Uzbekistan (29 kg per person), Kazakhstan (27 kg per person), and South Korea (14 kg per person).

From 2009 to 2019, the biggest increases were in Turkey, while beef per capita consumption for the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Production in Asia

In 2019, Asia’s production of cattle meat expanded modestly to 19M tonnes, with an increase of 2% on the previous year’s figure. The total output volume increased at an average annual rate of +1.7% from 2009 to 2019; the trend pattern remained consistent, with only minor fluctuations throughout the analyzed period. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2010 when the production volume increased by 3.8% y-o-y. Over the period under review, production reached the peak volume in 2019 and is likely to continue growing in the immediate term. The generally positive trend in terms output was largely conditioned by a mild increase in the number of producing animals and a relatively flat trend pattern in yield figures.

Production by Country in Asia

China (6.5M tonnes) is the largest cattle meat producer in the region, accounting for 34% of the total output. Moreover, beef production in China exceeded the figures recorded by the second-largest producer, India (2.6M tonnes), twofold. Pakistan (2M tonnes) ranked third in terms of total production with an 11% share.

In China, beef production was relatively stable over the past decade. The remaining producing countries recorded the following average annual rates of production growth: India (+0.6% per year) and Pakistan (+3.4% per year).

Producing Animals in Asia

In 2019, the number of animals slaughtered for beef production in Asia reached 116M heads, standing approx. at 2018. This number increased at an average annual rate of +1.1% from 2009 to 2019. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2010 when the number of producing animals increased by 2.9% year-to-year. Over the period under review, this number hit record highs in 2019 and is expected to retain growth in the near future.

Exports in Asia

In 2019, the amount of cattle meat exported in Asia totaled 1.3M tonnes, approximately equating 2018. In general, exports continue to indicate a prominent expansion. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2011 when exports increased by 67% against the previous year. Over the period under review, exports hit record highs at 1.7M tonnes in 2013; however, from 2014 to 2019, exports remained at a lower figure.

In value terms, beef exports declined to $4.1B (IndexBox estimates) in 2019.

Exports by Country

India dominates beef trade, accounting for 1.1M tonnes, which was near 85% of total Asian exports in 2019. Hong Kong (84K tonnes) held a 6.6% share (based on tonnes) of total exports, which put it in second place, followed by Pakistan (4.5%).

From 2009 to 2019, the average annual rates of growth with regard to beef exports from India stood at +9.5%. At the same time, Pakistan (+9.8%) and Hong Kong  (+8.1%) displayed positive paces of growth. Moreover, Pakistan emerged as the fastest-growing exporter exported in Asia, with a CAGR of +9.8% from 2009-2019. While the share of India (+51 p.p.), Hong Kong  (+3.6 p.p.) and Pakistan (+2.8 p.p.) increased significantly, the shares of the other countries remained relatively stable throughout the analyzed period.

In value terms, India ($3.1B) remains the largest beef supplier in Asia, comprising 77% of total exports. The second position in the ranking was occupied by Hong Kong  ($289M), with a 7.1% share of total exports.

In India, beef exports expanded at an average annual rate of +12.0% over the period from 2009-2019. The remaining exporting countries recorded the following average annual rates of export growth: Hong Kong  (+10.9% per year) and Pakistan (+15.2% per year).

Export Prices by Country

The beef export price in Asia stood at $3,158 per tonne in 2019, falling by -4.5% against the previous year. Over the period from 2009 to 2019, it increased at an average annual rate of +2.6%. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2011 when the export price increased by 21% year-to-year. The level of export peaked at $3,306 per tonne in 2018 and then shrank in the following year.

Average prices varied somewhat amongst the major exporting countries. In 2019, the country with the highest price was Pakistan ($3,815 per tonne), while India ($2,831 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2009 to 2019, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by Pakistan, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Imports in Asia

In 2019, purchases abroad of cattle meat decreased by -12.7% to 3.9M tonnes for the first time since 2008, thus ending a ten-year rising trend.

In value terms, beef imports contracted to $19.9B (IndexBox estimates) in 2019. In general, imports, however, enjoyed prominent growth. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2010 when imports increased by 22% y-o-y. Over the period under review, imports attained the maximum at $21.3B in 2018 and then shrank in the following year.

Imports by Country

In 2019, China (1.1M tonnes), distantly followed by Japan (617K tonnes), South Korea (444K tonnes), and Hong Kong  (365K tonnes) were the major importers of cattle meat, together committing 63% of total imports. The following importers – Malaysia (147K tonnes), Indonesia (141K tonnes), Taiwan (137K tonnes), the United Arab Emirates (133K tonnes), the Philippines (125K tonnes), Iran (119K tonnes), Israel (114K tonnes) and Saudi Arabia (86K tonnes) – together made up 25% of total imports.

From 2009 to 2019, the biggest increases were in China, while purchases for the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, the largest beef importing markets in Asia were China ($5B), Japan ($3.5B), and South Korea ($2.9B), with a combined 57% share of total imports.

Import Prices by Country

The beef import price in Asia stood at $5,039 per tonne in 2019, rising by 6.9% against the previous year.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of destination; the country with the highest price was Taiwan ($7,898 per tonne), while Malaysia ($3,172 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2009 to 2019, 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

pasta

The European Pasta Market Calms Down after the Strike of the Pandemic

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘EU – Uncooked Pasta – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends And Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The Hit of the Pandemic in Early 2020: Hype in Retail Demand against Disrupted Supply Chains

In 2019, the EU uncooked pasta market decreased by -2.5% to $5.2B (IndexBox estimates) for the first time since 2016, thus ending a two-year rising trend. Over the period under review, consumption, however, showed a relatively flat trend pattern. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2018 with an increase of 7% against the previous year. As a result, consumption attained a peak level of $5.3B, and then reduced slightly in the following year.

Population growth and disposable income growth remain the main market drivers, as well as rising international tourism. These factors, taking into account the general dynamics of the country’s economy, determine the development of the HoReCa sector, which also contributes to the growth of the market.

Until 2020, the European economy has been developing steadily for five years, although at a slower pace than in the previous decade. The slowdown in European economic growth was caused by a slowdown in the world’s economy, increased political uncertainty in the world, and trade wars between the United States and China. According to the World Bank outlook from January 2020, the European economy was expected to pick up the growth momentum and increase by from +2.5% to +2.7% per year in the medium term.

In early 2020, however, the European economy entered a period of the crisis caused by the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. In order to battle the spread of the virus, most countries in the world implemented quarantine measures that put on halt production and transport activity. The result will be a drop in GDP relative to previous years and a sharp fall in the demand for oil, which led to extremely low prices and heavy oil production cuts. The combination of those factors disrupts economic growth heavily throughout the world, increases unemployment, and lowers consumer spending. The European uncooked pasta market also faces challenges due to the pandemic, however, the market impact varies widely from the consumer level and through the supply chain.

Against the backdrop of the introduction of quarantine restrictions which lead to the closure of production, a halt in transport activity, and a drop in incomes, over March-April of 2020 many countries experienced a booming consumer demand for long-term storage food products, including pasta. This is quite typical: during any crisis, consumers buy more non-perishable products for the future, which applies primarily to cereals and pasta.

The closure of HoReCa threatens pasta suppliers with a loss of sales and forces them to seek new sales channels; however, the drop in demand from restaurants and cafes is to be partially offset by a spike in retail sales. With the onset of the coronavirus pandemic, there was an overwhelming demand for long-term essentials including cereals and pasta for a couple of months. Accordingly, increased demand for retail packaging against lower demand for bulk packages for HoReCa. On the other hand, as consumers buy more pasta for the future, there is an increasing need for retail packaging of a larger size.

Quarantine measures and the risk of mass illness of employees can lead to a temporary reduction in pasta production. In addition, a major COVID-related risk comes from the disruption of established international supply chains between durum wheat growers, importers, pasta producers, distributors, and retailers due to asynchronous quarantine measures and restricted transport activity. Problems with the export of paste due to asynchronous transport and cross-border restrictions can lead to overstocking of manufacturers’ warehouses, while the rush demand in retail in case of problems with transport and border crossings can lead to interruptions in supply. On the other hand, grain cultivation is less affected by the virus than the production of fruits and vegetables due to its high mechanization and less dependence on immigrant workers. This will contribute to the stability of the supply of durum wheat for the production of pasta.

With the weakening of quarantine measures and the creation of certain stocks, consumer demand is gradually normalizing, and the market is looking for a new balance of supply and demand. As shown below, gradual stabilization in pasta production and re-establishing cross-border supplies show a sign for the market is gradually finding the ‘new normality’.

Countries which Increased Their Local Output amid the Temporary Disruption of International Supply Chains Are Now Likely to Return to the Italian Pasta

In 2019, the amount of uncooked pasta produced in the European Union rose slightly to 5.5M tonnes, picking up by 1.8% compared with 2018 (IndexBox estimates). The total output volume increased at an average annual rate of +1.6% over the period from 2012 to 2019; the trend pattern remained relatively stable, with somewhat noticeable fluctuations being observed in certain years. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2015 with an increase of 4% against the previous year. The volume of production peaked in 2019 and is expected to retain growth in the immediate term.

Italy (3.5M tonnes) remains the largest uncooked pasta producing country in the European Union, comprising approx. 64% of the total volume. Moreover, uncooked pasta production in Italy exceeded the figures recorded by the second-largest producer, Spain (344K tonnes), tenfold. The third position in this ranking was occupied by Poland (268K tonnes), with a 4.9% share.

From 2012 to 2019, the average annual rate of growth in terms of volume in Italy amounted to +1.9%. The remaining producing countries recorded the following average annual rates of production growth: Spain (+3.3% per year) and Poland (+4.3% per year).

Italy also dominates uncooked pasta exports structure, recording 2M tonnes, which was near 76% of total exports in 2019. It was distantly followed by Spain (125K tonnes), committing a 4.9% share of total exports. Belgium (109K tonnes), Greece (61K tonnes), Germany (55K tonnes) and France (39K tonnes) took a little share of total exports.

On the other hand, the largest uncooked pasta importing markets (in value terms) in the European Union were Germany ($421M), France ($366M) and the UK ($205M), together accounting for 53% of total imports. The Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Sweden, Italy, Poland, Austria, the Czech Republic, and Denmark lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 34%.

At the beginning of 2020, certain shifts occurred in key market indicators. Thus, the coronavirus pandemic led to a strong increase in production in the pasta industry, which was caused by the rush of consumer demand for long-term storage products against the background of quarantine restrictions. At the same time, in Germany, France, and Spain, which constitute large importers of pasta, production increased even more than in Italy, due to a possible violation of the supply chain due to border closures and transport restrictions.

At the same time, in May, there was a decrease in production volumes in these countries, which indicates the stabilization of demand against the backdrop of easing quarantine restrictions and re-establishing the supply chains. If this trend continues, a significant decrease in imports from Italy is unlikely, and the most likely scenario is a gradual return to the usual supply chains and a gradual stabilization of the market.

The COVID Pandemic Did Not Bull the Producer Prices, Therefore the Pasta Prices in Major Consuming Countries Balance Out as the Rush in Demand Wanes

Against the background of production growth, at the beginning of 2020, there is a slight increase in the prices of pasta producers, but there are no extraordinary rates of price growth. Thus, producer prices rise slightly in Germany; in Italy and Spain, the prices show a stabilization sign after a slight increase in February-April, and in France, they even decline after rising in March-April.

Thus, the crisis of the COVID pandemic does not yet lead to a significant increase in prices, and the market is trying to find a new balance after the rush in March-April and the resulting increase in pasta production. Further price dynamics will depend on the situation with durum wheat supplies and the degree of threat of a new wave of quarantine restrictions. However, since some transport and cross-border restrictions still remain, local small price fluctuations are possible due to the current supply and demand conditions.

As for the prices of durum wheat, they have also been growing since the beginning of the year in almost all of the supplying countries. The only exception is Canada, where prices remained near the same level until April. Further price dynamics are subject to significant uncertainty due to the ongoing pandemic and the threat of worsening weather conditions and abnormal droughts, especially in Eastern Europe. If price increases continue, this will create an additional burden on pasta producers and force them to raise prices or lower margins in order to save consumers.

As for consumer prices for pasta products, their dynamics are largely determined by the same circumstances as the dynamics of production. Thus, with the onset of the pandemic in March-April, there has been a sharp increase in consumer prices for pasta, although producer prices during this period grew much less pronouncedly. This was due to the rush of demand for long-term retail products against the backdrop of strict quarantine restrictions, which, together with disruptions in supply chains, led to temporary local shortages of products. In May-June, as the situation improves and quarantine measures gradually soften, consumer prices stabilized or even decline.

Thus, the factor of consumer excitement is gradually disappearing, and in the future a stabilization or even some decrease in prices can be expected against the background of increased production, finding a new balance of demand and supply. However, due to the fact that some restrictions on transport activity persist, small price fluctuations in local markets due to disruptions in the supply chain are also possible.

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

supply management

Six Steps to Writing a Reliable Supply Management Plan

Whether you operate in the eCommerce industry, shipping, or physical retail with your own warehousing, a supply management plan is a must. Procuring goods and raw materials for further refinement, production, and overall monetization in an organized manner is a necessity of modern global industries.

According to Jigsaw Business Group, over one-third of businesses don’t have a clear image of how their suppliers and supply management is performing. Additionally, 37 percent of firms perform no practices for supply risk management, with only 8 percent performing above-average in these conditions. This showcases a larger issue in the supply management department of many large international businesses that rely on stable procurement without proper precautions and planning.

In worst cases, it can lead to loss of reputation, important clientele, and subsequent bankruptcy as a result of ad hoc management. To avoid that, outlining and implementing a supply management plan of your own is more than welcome going further into 2020. With that, let’s take a look at the specific benefits of having such a reliable plan in place, as well as the steps to get there.

The Advantages of a Supply Management Plan

Let’s briefly discuss the purpose of supply management before we dive into writing a plan centered on its implementation. As the name might suggest, supply management revolves around active tracking, procurement, and management of raw materials, production supplies, or items for handling and shipping. A standardized supply management plan is a welcome addition to any B2B-reliant business as it will effectively streamline your processes of ordering items from suppliers.

While rudimentary requests and correspondence can be achieved with writing tools such as WoWGrade and Evernote, creating a template for easy supply procurement is advised. Having such a document in place and available to your sales and supply departments can lead to highly beneficial outcomes for your business, including:

-Faster, more efficient cooperation with constant supply partners

-Minimized margin for supply procurement errors or mismanagement

-Increased production efficiency, turnaround time and bottom-line ROI

Writing the Supply Management Plan

1. Internal Company Survey

To achieve the most out of your supply management plan writing initiative, you should audit your current supply pipeline carefully. Assess the status of your supply routine, paperwork, existing communication channels, and QA processes before writing a plan outline for future use.

It’s important to take a good look at how things function in your company at the moment to identify bottlenecks and improvement opportunities early on. Additionally, forming a supply management plan task force can also prove useful since it will give several employees a clear goal in writing the document.

2. Assemble your Writing Stack

Writing a supply management plan is not unlike writing any other form of business document. Meaning, it should be done in a planned manner to avoid mistakes, related to both grammar and legalities. To ensure just that, several cloud-based writing platforms are available for your convenience:

Grammarly – platform dedicated to spell-checking, proofreading and error-free writing

Trust My Paper – outsourcing platform with numerous professional editors available for writing assistance

Hemingway – tool designed with readability and sentence construction in mind, useful for supply documents

Grab My Essay – platform which houses numerous editing, rewriting and on-demand writing services

Thesaurus – a vocabulary tool useful for industry-specific terminology required for supply procurement

Studicus – in addition to procurement documents, various types of correspondence can be outsourced here

3. Supply Management Plan Overview

The easiest way to get ahead on your supply management plan writing is to start with the outline and move things forward from there. An outline represents a set of subheadings and categories that will be filled with important procurement information once the order is about to be made.

Given its nature, some of the elements it should contain include storage information, transportation details, special order requirements, personnel information, etc. Use editing and formatting tools such as Supreme Dissertations and Readable to create legible documents for your B2B procurement and correspondence. Make a clear plan of which items are primary to your business to give the supplier enough information on how to proceed with your order.

4. Supply Requirements & Timelines

Once your outline is in place, it’s important to include fields for numeric data in your supply management plan. Information on the number of your orders, types of materials you’ve requested, as well as the optimal delivery timeline field, is essential in the document. These details can be outlined via writing platforms such as Best Essay Education or even Google Docs depending on the complexity of your typical procurements.

In practice, the supply requirements and timeline fields will be the first items your suppliers and B2B partners will scan through to ensure their availability. To further improve the document’s legibility, you can include easy-to-spot contact information in regards to your sales department. This will allow for a faster approval process and further streamline your supply management in light of newly-outlined standardization documents.

5. Detail the QA Standards

Lastly, risk management is a pivotal factor in the supply chain management, one which can make or break your pipeline’s efficacy going forward. The supply management plan you outline and ship to B2B partners must require detailed information on the QA standards of your company.

Shipping items such as hazardous materials, medical equipment, chemical compounds, and other dangerous elements will naturally require careful handling, shipping, and storage of said goods. Be upfront with your suppliers in regard to QA standards. This is especially welcome if you order materials from abroad – your shipments and B2B relations will be that much more stable as a result.

Supply Management Plan Implementation

While supply management trends continue to spiral toward digitalization, written procurement documents are still vital for effective B2B communication and shipping of essential goods. Create an outline that reflects both your service portfolio and internal work ethics using the above-discussed steps as guidelines.

Don’t be afraid to revise and reformat your own supply management plan as much as necessary before settling for a standardized template for company-wide use. Once you get a handle on your procurement writing pipeline, supply chain management of your warehousing and shipping requests will become that much simpler.

___________________________________________________________

Kristin Savage nourishes, sparks and empowers using the magic of a word. Along with pursuing her degree in Creative Writing, Kristin was gaining experience in the publishing industry, with expertise in marketing strategy for publishers and authors. Now she had found herself as a freelance writer. Kristin runs her own FlyWriting blog.

millet

U.S. Millet Market – Key Statistics and Trends

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

The revenue of the millet market in the U.S. amounted to $106M in 2018, approximately equating 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 +1.7% over the period from 2014 to 2018; however, the trend pattern remained relatively stable, with only minor fluctuations being recorded over the period under review. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2017 with an increase of 10% against the previous year. In that year, the millet market attained its peak level of $108M, and then declined slightly in the following year.

Market Forecast to 2030

Driven by increasing demand for millet in the U.S., the market is expected to continue an upward consumption trend over the next decade. Market performance is forecast to decelerate, expanding with an anticipated CAGR of +0.8% for the period from 2018 to 2030, which is projected to bring the market volume to 312K tonnes by the end of 2030.

Production in the U.S.

Millet production in the U.S. amounted to 326K tonnes in 2018, dropping by -19.5% against the previous year. From 2014 to 2018, the total output volume increased at an average annual rate of +1.6%, which was largely conditioned by a slight expansion of the harvested area and a perceptible increase in yield figures.

Harvested Area in the U.S.

Millet harvested area in the U.S. stood at 163K ha in 2018, stabilizing at the previous year. Over the period under review, the harvested area dedicated to millet production attained its peak figure at 174K ha in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, harvested area failed to regain its momentum.

Yield in the U.S.

In 2018, the average millet yield in the U.S. amounted to 2 tonne per ha, declining by -19.5% against the previous year. The yield figure increased at an average annual rate of +3.3% from 2014 to 2018.

Exports from the U.S.

Millet exports from the U.S. totaled 43K tonnes in 2018, going down by -48% against the previous year. In value terms, millet exports amounted to $16M (IndexBox estimates).

Exports by Country

Canada (11K tonnes), Indonesia (5.6K tonnes) and the Philippines (3.7K tonnes) were the main destinations of millet exports from the U.S., with a combined 47% share of total exports. Malaysia, Namibia, Mexico, Japan, Germany, Thailand, the UK and the United Arab Emirates lagged somewhat behind, together accounting for a further 39%.

In value terms, Canada ($3.6M), Indonesia ($1.8M) and the Philippines ($1.2M) constituted the largest markets for millet exported from the U.S. worldwide, together accounting for 43% of total exports. Malaysia, Namibia, the UK, Germany, Thailand, Mexico, Japan and the United Arab Emirates lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 41%.

Among the main countries of destination, Namibia recorded the highest growth rate of the value of exports, over the period under review, while exports for the other leaders experienced mixed trend patterns.

Export Prices by Country

In 2018, the average millet export price amounted to $367 per tonne, surging by 16% against the previous year.

There were significant differences in the average prices for the major foreign markets. In 2018, the country with the highest price was the UK ($600 per tonne), while the average price for exports to Mexico ($295 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2014 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was recorded for supplies to Thailand, while the prices for the other major destinations experienced a decline.

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

preserved vegetable

Global Temporarily Preserved Vegetable Trade – Italy, Japan, and France are the World’s Largest Importers

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

Imports 2007-2018

In 2018, the amount of canned vegetables imported worldwide totaled 593K tonnes, standing approx. at the previous year. Overall, temporarily preserved vegetable imports, however, continue to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2017 when imports increased by 13% against the previous year. In that year, global temporarily preserved vegetable imports attained their peak of 595K tonnes, leveling off in the following year.

In value terms, temporarily preserved vegetable imports stood at $649M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018.

Imports by Country

The countries with the highest levels of temporarily preserved vegetable imports in 2018 were Japan (71K tonnes), South Korea (66K tonnes), Italy (55K tonnes), Spain (44K tonnes), France (41K tonnes), Brazil (31K tonnes), Russia (31K tonnes), the U.S. (26K tonnes), Belgium (21K tonnes), Germany (20K tonnes), the UK (19K tonnes) and Chile (15K tonnes), together reaching 74% 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 Brazil, while imports for the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, the largest temporarily preserved vegetable importing markets worldwide were Italy ($98M), Japan ($77M) and France ($50M), together accounting for 35% of global imports. Spain, Germany, Brazil, Belgium, South Korea, the U.S., the UK, Russia and Chile lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 39%.

Among the main importing countries, Brazil experienced the highest growth rate of the value of imports, over the period under review, while imports for the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Import Prices by Country

In 2018, the average temporarily preserved vegetable import price amounted to $1,094 per tonne, jumping by 3.6% against the previous year. Over the period under review, the temporarily preserved vegetable import price, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2008 when the average import price increased by 6.5% y-o-y. The global import price peaked at $1,303 per tonne in 2013; however, from 2014 to 2018, import prices failed to regain their momentum.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of destination; the country with the highest price was Italy ($1,769 per tonne), while South Korea ($427 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 global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

flatware

U.S. Is the World’s Largest Market for Imported Table Flatware ($515M), Comprising 21% of Global Imports

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

The global table flatware market revenue amounted to $6.3B in 2018, increasing by 3.8% 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).

Global Exports 2013-2018

In 2018, approx. 340K tonnes of table flatware were exported worldwide; standing approx. at the previous year. In general, table flatware exports, however, continue to indicate a measured setback. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2017 with an increase of 7.6% y-o-y. Over the period under review, global table flatware exports attained their maximum at 380K tonnes in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, exports failed to regain their momentum.

In value terms, table flatware exports amounted to $2.7B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018.

Exports by Country

China dominates table flatware exports structure, amounting to 274K tonnes, which was approx. 81% of total exports in 2018. Viet Nam (9.6K tonnes), Germany (7.7K tonnes) and India (5.6K tonnes) followed a long way behind the leaders.

Exports from China decreased at an average annual rate of -2.4% from 2013 to 2018. At the same time, Viet Nam (+1.8%) displayed positive paces of growth. Moreover, Viet Nam emerged as the fastest-growing exporter exported in the world, with a CAGR of +1.8% from 2013-2018. Germany experienced a relatively flat trend pattern. By contrast, India (-7.0%) illustrated a downward trend over the same period. China (-10.5 p.p.) significantly weakened its position in terms of the global exports, while the shares of the other countries remained relatively stable throughout the analyzed period.

In value terms, China ($1.9B) remains the largest table flatware supplier worldwide, comprising 70% of global exports. The second position in the ranking was occupied by Viet Nam ($129M), with a 4.8% share of global exports. It was followed by Germany, with a 4.2% share.

In China, table flatware exports remained relatively stable over the period from 2013-2018. The remaining exporting countries recorded the following average annual rates of exports growth: Viet Nam (+0.7% per year) and Germany (-0.3% per year).

Export Prices by Country

In 2018, the average table flatware export price amounted to $7,997 per tonne, jumping by 4% against the previous year. Over the period from 2013 to 2018, it increased at an average annual rate of +2.2%. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2015 an increase of 10% y-o-y. In that year, the average export prices for table flatware attained their peak level of $8,036 per tonne; afterwards, it flattened through to 2018.

There were significant differences in the average prices amongst the major exporting countries. In 2018, the country with the highest price was Germany ($14,767 per tonne), while China ($6,989 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2013 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by India, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Global Imports 2013-2018

In 2018, the global imports of table flatware amounted to 328K tonnes, jumping by 3.7% against the previous year.

In value terms, table flatware imports amounted to $2.5B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018.

Imports by Country

In 2018, the U.S. (61K tonnes), distantly followed by Germany (15K tonnes) were the main importers of table flatware, together comprising 23% of total imports. The UK (14K tonnes), Indonesia (9.4K tonnes), the United Arab Emirates (8.7K tonnes), France (8.6K tonnes), Canada (8.5K tonnes), Iran (8.1K tonnes), the Philippines (7.9K tonnes), the Netherlands (7.6K tonnes), Spain (7.5K tonnes) and Iraq (7.4K tonnes) followed a long way behind the leaders.

Imports into the U.S. increased at an average annual rate of +1.5% from 2013 to 2018. At the same time, Indonesia (+22.3%), Iraq (+11.1%), Spain (+8.6%), the Netherlands (+5.6%) and the Philippines (+5.4%) displayed positive paces of growth. Moreover, Indonesia emerged as the fastest-growing importer imported in the world, with a CAGR of +22.3% from 2013-2018. Canada experienced a relatively flat trend pattern.

By contrast, the UK (-1.6%), Germany (-4.2%), France (-4.7%), the United Arab Emirates (-9.2%) and Iran (-11.2%) illustrated a downward trend over the same period. From 2013 to 2018, the share of Indonesia increased by +1.8% percentage points, while the United Arab Emirates (-1.7 p.p.) and Iran (-2 p.p.) saw their share reduced. The shares of the other countries remained relatively stable throughout the analyzed period.

In value terms, the U.S. ($515M) constitutes the largest market for imported table flatware worldwide, comprising 21% of global imports. The second position in the ranking was occupied by Germany ($176M), with a 7.1% share of global imports. It was followed by the UK, with a 4.6% share.

From 2013 to 2018, the average annual growth rate of value in the U.S. totaled +1.7%. In the other countries, the average annual rates were as follows: Germany (-2.5% per year) and the UK (-0.0% per year).

Import Prices by Country

The average table flatware import price stood at $7,533 per tonne in 2018, approximately reflecting the previous year. There were significant differences in the average prices amongst the major importing countries. In 2018, the country with the highest price was Germany ($11,354 per tonne), while Iran ($3,877 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2013 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by Iraq, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

silicates

Global Silicates Market – the Import Value Almost Doubled in the Past Five Years Due to Price Increases

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘World – Double Or Complex Silicates – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends And Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The global double or complex silicates market revenue amounted to $1.9B in 2018, approximately reflecting the previous year. he market value increased at an average annual rate of +4.1% from 2014 to 2018; the trend pattern remained relatively stable, with only minor fluctuations being recorded over the period under review. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2017 when the market value increased by 9.8% y-o-y. Over the period under review, the global double or complex silicates market reached its maximum level in 2018 and is likely to see gradual growth in the near future.

Global Silicates Imports 2014-2018

Global imports totaled 404K tonnes in 2018, picking up by 4.2% against the previous year. The total import volume increased at an average annual rate of +2.6% from 2014 to 2018; the trend pattern remained consistent, with somewhat noticeable fluctuations being observed over the period under review. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2015 with an increase of 11% year-to-year. The global imports peaked in 2018 and are likely to continue its growth in the immediate term.

In value terms, double or complex silicates imports amounted to $843M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. Over the period under review, the total imports indicated a strong expansion from 2014 to 2018: its value increased at an average annual rate of +2.6% over the last four years. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, double or complex silicates imports increased by +78.7% against 2014 indices. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2017 when imports increased by 38% year-to-year. Over the period under review, global double or complex silicates imports hit record highs in 2018 and are likely to see gradual growth in years to come.

Imports by Country

Germany (47K tonnes), the U.S. (38K tonnes) and Japan (31K tonnes) represented roughly 29% of total imports of double or complex silicates in 2018. France (20K tonnes) held the next position in the ranking, followed by the Netherlands (20K tonnes). All these countries together held near 9.8% share of total imports. The following importers – Indonesia (17K tonnes), the UK (17K tonnes), Poland (16K tonnes), Austria (16K tonnes), China (13K tonnes), Peru (12K tonnes) and Italy (10K tonnes) – together made up 25% of total imports.

From 2014 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of imports, amongst the main importing countries, was attained by the U.S. (+83.6% per year), while imports for the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, the largest double or complex silicates importing markets worldwide were Germany ($143M), the Netherlands ($103M) and the U.S. ($90M), with a combined 40% share of global imports. France, Poland, the UK, Japan, China, Italy, Indonesia, Austria and Peru lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 35%.

Import Prices by Country

In 2018, the average double or complex silicates import price amounted to $2,084 per tonne, rising by 4.2% against the previous year. Over the period under review, the import price indicated a remarkable expansion from 2014 to 2018: its price increased at an average annual rate of +12.7% over the last four-year period. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, double or complex silicates import price increased by +61.0% against 2014 indices. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2017 an increase of 25% against the previous year. The global import price peaked in 2018 and is likely to continue its growth in the near future.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of destination; the country with the highest price was the Netherlands ($5,276 per tonne), while Peru ($569 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2014 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by Poland, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

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 supply chain

Sales & Operations Planning: A Long-Term Solution to Global Supply Chain Volatility

As companies strive to provide the highest quality and service at the lowest cost, global supply chains play a vital role. Companies often approach their global supply chain planning with a “do it and forget it” attitude, expecting that a detailed identification, verification and qualification process will not require frequent revisits of past decisions. Global political climates, tariff wars, and the recent COVID-19 virus outbreak continue to illustrate the urgent need for supply chain agility, risk management and contingency planning.

Sales & Operations Planning (S&OP) is a mid-term tool to ensure alignment among corporate strategic objectives, whereas Sales & Operations Execution (S&OE) is a tool to ensure balance among supply and demand. The flexibility of S&OP allows for an organization to look for imbalances at intermediate levels in a product hierarchy without getting “lost in the weeds” at detailed SKUs but not at too high of a level to be less meaningful.

In order to review this supply and demand balance, one must create supply planning groups and a structure based upon the critical success factors for delivering high levels of service. These planning groups could be internal manufacturing groups, make/buy items, a specific external supplier, or country of origin groupings. Given the extended lead times for international supply chains, S&OP is an ideal process for looking several months out into the future to perform risk analysis.

Strategic Considerations for International Sourcing

Companies initially evaluate their strategic objectives when pursuing an international sourcing initiative, but this should be revisited on a regular basis to ensure that the chosen supply chain continues to meet the companies’ needs. The lowest total cost of ownership is the primary objective, yet as manufacturing has declined in Western economies, the only source for production is often in the younger global economies such as China, India, Malaysia or countries of Eastern Europe.

Over time, labor rates and raw material costs in these countries have fluctuated due to global supply and demand. Combined with changing prices for the underlying commodities in those local markets, companies are facing more frequent price instability. Additionally, tariff uncertainty or increases force a regular review of the global supply chain to ensure strategic objectives have not changed and are still being fulfilled.

Supply Chain Complexity vs. Diversification

It is easier for a supply chain team to manage a single production site within a single manufacturer or at least from within a single country of origin. The obvious downside to that approach is that if that country is subject to a sudden tariff spike, an organization can quickly find itself with no choice but to accept the increase in costs and a likely impact to margins. As a potential alternative, a company can pursue a dual country sourcing strategy where it can cost-average its pricing to mitigate the short-term impact. Over a longer-term, a purchaser has the opportunity to switch volumes between suppliers/countries to mitigate those impacts.

How can S&OP help?

By its very design, the S&OP process is an ideal vehicle to prompt a company to ask the necessary strategic questions on a regular basis. In addition, a robust S&OP process takes into consideration changing costs and gross margin impacts to the bottom line to ensure gross margin or revenue targets are met. Stepping out of the day-to-day S&OE during the S&OP process allows for that broader perspective to evaluate “what-if” situations that could impact costs, demand, supply and margins before they reach fruition. In this manner, S&OP is a useful scenario-management tool to look at these cost changes, price increases and estimated adjustments to volumes at an aggregate level to quickly identify the potential impacts to the bottom-line without having to perform a time-consuming SKU-by-SKU analysis.

Contemporary S&OP tools often have scenario-modeling capabilities and increase the speed and accuracy of these strategic evaluation exercises. However, depending upon the scale and scope of a company’s supply chain, an expensive tool is not always necessary. Well-designed spreadsheet models populated by databases may be a sufficient starting point for a business. No matter what tool is utilized, the S&OP process is designed to identify potential issues and act as a launching point for projects elsewhere in the organization to identify methods for addressing those issues in the most cost-effective manner.

Companies with well-designed and utilized Sales & Operations Planning processes have well-demonstrated benefits of:

-Reduced stock-outs, driving higher service level

-Lower variable labor costs

-More efficient raw material, work-in-process and finished goods inventory utilization

-Lower transportation and material acquisition costs due to more stability

-Higher gross margins

-Increased top-line sales

Strategically including tariff management and other global supply chain variables in the S&OP process to evaluate possible impacts to the supply and demand balance, as well as cost structure, is critical to ensuring the continuity of supply necessary to provide high levels of service and cost management.

________________________________________________________________

Paul Baris is a supply chain expert with over 30 years of experience in the industry as a Vice President of Supply Chain for several companies as well as a consultant implementing Sales & Operations Planning, Inventory Strategy and Demand Planning practices.

Paul’s strengths include: Operational Performance, Root Cause Analysis, Lean & Six Sigma Methodology, Client & Vendor Liaison, Leadership, ERP, Strategic Procurement, Project Management, Warehouse Redesign/Implementation, Supply Chain Engineering, Statistical Process Control, 3PL Management, WMS, Demand Planning, Inventory Planning, Change Management, S&OP, and Operational Layouts. Paul is a certified supply chain professional from APICS and has a Certification in Supply Chain Management from the University of Tennessee. Paul’s professional certifications include: Change Management – Prosci ADKAR, Professional Negotiation – Karrass, Juran on Quality I & II – Kepner-Tregoe, Strategic Procurement – Stanford University, Statistical Process Control, Purchasing Strategy, Oliver Wight S&OP, and S&OP Implementation.

ethanol

Global Ethanol Market – the U.S. Emerged as the World’s Largest and Fastest-growing Supplier

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

Global Ethyl Alcohol Trade 2007-2018

In 2018, the amount of ethyl alcohol exported worldwide amounted to 17B litres, going up by 24% against the previous year. In general, the total exports indicated prominent growth from 2007 to 2018: its volume increased at an average annual rate of +7.9% over the last eleven-year period. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, ethanol exports increased by +79.8% against 2014 indices. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2011 with an increase of 47% against the previous year. The global exports peaked in 2018 and are likely to see steady growth in the near future.

In value terms, ethanol exports stood at $8.7B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. In general, the total exports indicated a buoyant expansion from 2007 to 2018: its value increased at an average annual rate of +7.9% over the last eleven-year period. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, ethanol exports increased by +21.6% against 2015 indices. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2011 with an increase of 60% year-to-year. In that year, global ethanol exports reached their peak of $9.7B. From 2012 to 2018, the growth of global ethanol exports failed to regain its momentum.

Exports by Country

The U.S. was the largest exporter of ethyl alcohol exported in the world, with the volume of exports finishing at 7.8B litres, which was approx. 45% of total exports in 2018. It was distantly followed by Brazil (1.6B litres), the Netherlands (1.2B litres), France (0.9B litres) and Pakistan (0.8B litres), together generating a 27% share of total exports. Hungary (550M litres), Belgium (535M litres), the UK (449M litres), Germany (432M litres) and South Africa (278M litres) held a relatively small share of total exports.

The U.S. was also the fastest-growing in terms of the ethyl alcohol exports, with a CAGR of +25.6% from 2007 to 2018. At the same time, Hungary (+22.6%), the Netherlands (+10.9%), Pakistan (+10.6%), Germany (+9.4%), Belgium (+7.6%), the UK (+7.4%), France (+6.7%) and South Africa (+3.9%) displayed positive paces of growth.

By contrast, Brazil (-4.0%) illustrated a downward trend over the same period. The U.S. (+42 p.p.), the Netherlands (+4.9 p.p.), Pakistan (+3 p.p.), Hungary (+2.8 p.p.), France (+2.8 p.p.), Belgium (+1.7 p.p.) and Germany (+1.6 p.p.) significantly strengthened its position in terms of the global exports, while Brazil saw its share reduced by -5.3% from 2007 to 2018, respectively. The shares of the other countries remained relatively stable throughout the analyzed period.

In value terms, the U.S. ($2.8B) remains the largest ethanol supplier worldwide, comprising 32% of global exports. The second position in the ranking was occupied by Brazil ($892M), with a 10% share of global exports. It was followed by the Netherlands, with a 9.4% share.

Imports by Country

In 2018, Brazil (2,270M litres), Canada (1,626M litres), Germany (1,321M litres), the U.S. (1,318M litres), the Netherlands (1,056M litres), Japan (875M litres), the UK (683M litres), India (571M litres), South Korea (422M litres), the Philippines (415M litres), the United Arab Emirates (383M litres) and France (271M litres) was the largest importer of ethyl alcohol imported in the world, committing 74% 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 Brazil, while imports for the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, Germany ($832M), Brazil ($777M) and the U.S. ($705M) constituted the countries with the highest levels of imports in 2018, with a combined 28% share of global imports. The Netherlands, Canada, Japan, the UK, India, the Philippines, South Korea, France and the United Arab Emirates lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 40%.

The Philippines recorded the highest growth rate of the value of imports, in terms of the main importing countries over the period under review, while imports for the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Import Prices by Country

The average ethanol import price stood at $0.5 per litre in 2018, waning by -13.1% against the previous year. Over the period under review, the ethanol import price continues to indicate a mild contraction. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2011 when the average import price increased by 19% y-o-y. The global import price peaked at $0.8 per litre in 2012; however, from 2013 to 2018, import prices remained at a lower figure.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of destination; the country with the highest price was France ($0.7 per litre), while Brazil ($0.3 per litre) was amongst the lowest.

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

Source: IndexBox AI Platform