Global Coconut Market 2019 – Thailand’s Imports Continue to Grow Robustly, While Domestic Production Declines

Archives, Global Trade Daily, Imports/Exports

Global Coconut Market 2019 – Thailand’s Imports Continue to Grow Robustly, While Domestic Production Declines

September 18th, 2019 IndexBox Leave a comment

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

In 2018, the global coconut market size increased by 3.5% to $35.6B. 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).

Consumption By Country

The countries with the highest volumes of coconut consumption in 2018 were Indonesia (19M tonnes), the Philippines (14M tonnes) and India (12M tonnes), with a combined 72% share of global consumption. Sri Lanka, Brazil, Viet Nam, Papua New Guinea, Mexico and Thailand lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 16%.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of coconut consumption, amongst the main consuming countries, was attained by Viet Nam, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, India ($10B), the Philippines ($6.7B) and Indonesia ($4.5B) appeared to be the countries with the highest levels of market value in 2018, with a combined 60% share of the global market. These countries were followed by Sri Lanka, Brazil, Papua New Guinea, Thailand, Viet Nam and Mexico, which together accounted for a further 20%.

The countries with the highest levels of coconut per capita consumption in 2018 were Papua New Guinea (140 kg per person), the Philippines (131 kg per person) and Sri Lanka (124 kg per person).

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of coconut per capita consumption, amongst the main consuming countries, was attained by Viet Nam, while the other global leaders experienced mixed trends in the per capita consumption figures.

Production 2007-2018

In 2018, approx. 61M tonnes of coconuts were produced worldwide; leveling off at the previous year. Overall, coconut production continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2012 with an increase of 5.3% y-o-y. Over the period under review, global coconut production attained its peak figure volume at 62M tonnes in 2013; however, from 2014 to 2018, production failed to regain its momentum. The general negative trend in terms of coconut output was largely conditioned by a relatively flat trend pattern of the harvested area and a relatively flat trend pattern in yield figures.

In value terms, coconut production stood at $36.3B in 2018 estimated in export prices. Overall, the total output indicated a mild expansion from 2007 to 2018: its value decreased at an average annual rate of -0.1% over the last eleven-year period. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, coconut production increased by +35.7% against 2016 indices. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2009 when production volume increased by 50% y-o-y. In that year, global coconut production reached its peak level of $49.4B. From 2010 to 2018, global coconut production growth remained at a lower figure.

Production By Country

The countries with the highest volumes of coconut production in 2018 were Indonesia (19M tonnes), the Philippines (14M tonnes) and India (12M tonnes), together accounting for 73% of global production. These countries were followed by Sri Lanka, Brazil, Viet Nam, Papua New Guinea and Mexico, which together accounted for a further 15%.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of coconut production, amongst the main producing countries, was attained by Viet Nam, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Harvested Area 2007-2018

In 2018, approx. 12M ha of coconuts were harvested worldwide; standing approx. at the previous year. In general, the coconut harvested area continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2010 with an increase of 2.5% y-o-y. Over the period under review, the harvested area dedicated to coconut production attained its peak figure in 2018 and is expected to retain its growth in the near future.

Yield 2007-2018

In 2018, the global average yield of coconuts amounted to 4.9 tonne per ha, approximately reflecting the previous year. In general, the coconut yield continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2012 with an increase of 4.3% against the previous year. Over the period under review, the average coconut yield attained its maximum level at 5.4 tonne per ha in 2007; however, from 2008 to 2018, yield stood at a somewhat lower figure.

Exports 2007-2018

Global exports stood at 555K tonnes in 2018, surging by 49% against the previous year. Overall, the total exports indicated resilient growth from 2007 to 2018: its volume increased at an average annual rate of +7.3% over the last eleven years. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2018 with an increase of 49% against the previous year. In that year, global coconut exports reached their peak and are likely to continue its growth in the immediate term.

In value terms, coconut exports totaled $269M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. Overall, the total exports indicated a buoyant increase from 2007 to 2018: its value increased at an average annual rate of +7.3% over the last eleven years. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, coconut exports increased by +107.2% against 2012 indices. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2014 with an increase of 33% year-to-year. Over the period under review, global coconut exports reached their maximum in 2018 and are expected to retain its growth in the near future.

Exports by Country

Indonesia was the largest exporter of coconuts in the world, with the volume of exports amounting to 290K tonnes, which was near 52% of total exports in 2018. Thailand (70K tonnes) took the second position in the ranking, followed by Viet Nam (57K tonnes). All these countries together held near 23% share of total exports. The following exporters – Cote d’Ivoire (23K tonnes), Malaysia (19K tonnes), the Netherlands (16K tonnes), Mexico (14K tonnes), Guyana (12K tonnes) and India (11K tonnes) – together made up 17% of total exports.

Exports from Indonesia increased at an average annual rate of +12.8% from 2007 to 2018. At the same time, Guyana (+97.7%), Viet Nam (+43.2%), Malaysia (+18.9%), India (+11.3%), the Netherlands (+6.8%), Thailand (+6.4%), Cote d’Ivoire (+4.2%) and Mexico (+3.9%) displayed positive paces of growth. Moreover, Guyana emerged as the fastest-growing exporter in the world, with a CAGR of +97.7% from 2007-2018. While the share of Indonesia (+38 p.p.), Viet Nam (+10 p.p.), Thailand (+6.2 p.p.), Malaysia (+2.9 p.p.) and Guyana (+2.1 p.p.) increased significantly, the shares of the other countries remained relatively stable throughout the analyzed period.

In value terms, the largest coconut markets worldwide were Thailand ($70M), Indonesia ($65M) and Viet Nam ($22M), with a combined 58% share of global exports. Cote d’Ivoire, the Netherlands, India, Mexico, Guyana and Malaysia lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 23%.

Among the main exporting countries, Guyana (+104.1% per year) recorded the highest rates of growth with regard to exports, over the last eleven years, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Export Prices by Country

In 2018, the average coconut export price amounted to $483 per tonne, declining by -12.6% against the previous year. Overall, the coconut export price, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2008 an increase of 19% against the previous year. Over the period under review, the average export prices for coconuts reached their peak figure at $553 per tonne in 2017, and then declined slightly in the following year.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of origin; the country with the highest price was India ($1,127 per tonne), while Indonesia ($223 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2007 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.

Imports 2007-2018

In 2018, approx. 671K tonnes of coconuts were imported worldwide; surging by 26% against the previous year. In general, coconut imports continue to indicate a resilient increase. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2016 when imports increased by 48% against the previous year. Over the period under review, global coconut imports reached their peak figure in 2018 and are likely to continue its growth in the immediate term.

In value terms, coconut imports totaled $334M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. In general, coconut imports continue to indicate a remarkable expansion. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2011 with an increase of 43% y-o-y. The global imports peaked in 2018 and are likely to see steady growth in the immediate term.

Imports by Country

Thailand (210K tonnes) and Malaysia (199K tonnes) were the largest importers of coconuts in 2018, reaching approx. 31% and 30% of total imports, respectively. China (60K tonnes) ranks next in terms of the total imports with a 9% share, followed by the U.S. (5.7%). The United Arab Emirates (27K tonnes), the Netherlands (19K tonnes) and Singapore (11K tonnes) followed a long way behind the leaders.

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

In value terms, Thailand ($77M) constitutes the largest market for imported coconuts worldwide, comprising 23% of global imports. The second position in the ranking was occupied by the U.S. ($34M), with a 10% share of global imports. It was followed by China, with a 8.9% share.

In Thailand, coconut imports increased at an average annual rate of +30.9% over the period from 2007-2018. In the other countries, the average annual rates were as follows: the U.S. (+12.0% per year) and China (+8.2% per year).

Import Prices by Country

The average coconut import price stood at $498 per tonne in 2018, falling by -5.9% against the previous year. Over the period under review, the coconut import price continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2015 when the average import price increased by 23% year-to-year. In that year, the average import prices for coconuts reached their peak level of $631 per tonne. From 2016 to 2018, the growth in terms of the average import prices for coconuts remained at a somewhat lower figure.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of destination; the country with the highest price was the U.S. ($880 per tonne), while Malaysia ($147 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

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

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

Archives, Global Trade Daily, International Trade

TARIFFS: NAVIGATING THE LATEST TARIFFS ON CHINESE GOODS

September 12th, 2019 Mark Ludwikowski and Courtney Taylor Leave a comment

Despite recent plans to revive moribund negotiations, the prospects for a near term solution to the U.S.- China trade conflict are very much in doubt. The United States has expanded the tariffs already in place to cover nearly all imports from China, and in response China has hit back with tariffs of its own where it may hurt U.S. exports the most, mainly in swing-state industries such as farming and automobile production.

The stock markets and economic growth in each country have increasingly shown signs of strain from the trade war and a cease-fire could provide a welcome respite. Although the Trump administration has agreed to renew trade negotiations in early October, it would be irresponsible to expect these talks to arrive at a meaningful resolution based on how entrenched each side has become. Leaving fate in the hands of the negotiators is risky business since prior negotiations have stalled or led to further escalations. So what can companies do to protect their interests and to mitigate the impact of the tariffs?

Many companies find they cannot quickly change their supply chains or stop doing business with China. This is because U.S. importers and producers are dependent on Chinese parts makers. Some of these parts may not be available in the United States or third countries. Moving production to the United States could itself take years. But in the short term, companies can take certain steps to mitigate the impact of the tariffs.

First, companies should consider seeking official exclusions from the tariffs with the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR). Since importers are responsible for paying the tariff amounts, it is crucial that they are well informed about the exclusion process and consider filing requests as soon as possible since deadlines are looming.

Tariffs on imports from China have been divided into four separate Lists; goods on Lists 1 and 2 encompass roughly $50 billion of imports from China and their exclusion process has closed. Lists 3 and 4 cover the remaining $500 billion of imports and are entering their final phase.

List 3 goods have been subject to a 25 percent tariff since May 2019, but the rate is set to increase to 30 percent on October 15, 2019 (originally the increase was set for October 1, but President Trump has extended it by two weeks as a gesture of “good will” towards China). The deadline for requesting List 3 exclusions is September 30.

List 4 goods, or all goods not presently covered by Lists 1-3, are subject to a 15 percent tariff effective September 1 (List 4A), or December 15 (List 4B). The exclusion process for List 4 has yet to be announced, but is likely to resemble that which applied to the previous Lists.

What makes an exclusion request successful? This has been like reading tea leaves, although certain patterns have emerged. Namely, successful applications are extremely detailed and provide adequate information for USTR staff on which to base their opinion. Products not manufactured in the United States, products for which the manufacturer has a U.S. or foreign patent, or products which are difficult to manufacture in the United States due to high costs or environmental concerns are examples of those for which the USTR has approved exclusions.

Other factors which have shown to affect exclusions include: potential U.S. jobs lost; financial impact on an industry sector; store of facility closings; customer demographics; ability of the customers to accept some of the tariff costs; geographic location; whether the products are included in the “Made in China 2025” policies; capacity of U.S. manufacturers to produce the quantities and quality required for the product; impact on swing states in the next presidential election; or effective public relations.

However, an exclusion request can take time to submit, and often much longer for the USTR to reach a determination. Exclusions have also been rare.

For those looking for another option, a change in the product’s customs classification may provide a viable option. U.S. Customs and Border Protection can only levy tariffs on the condition of goods as imported. When goods are imported, they are assigned a specific classification under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) subheading. Each subheading for Chinese imports is assigned a specific tariff rate depending on where it falls on Lists 1-4. U.S. companies can work with their Chinese suppliers to determine whether certain products could be shipped in separate parts, finished or unfinished, or in embellished forms so that they legally fall under an HTS subheading assigned to a lower tariff rate.

For some U.S. companies, passing on of the tariff cost to their consumers may be preferable. But for many, this is not a competitive solution. Some customers simply will not tolerate the increased pricing and demand for the products would correspondingly decline.

While it is not always a quick solution, U.S. companies concerned about the duration of the current trade war may also consider diversifying their sourcing away from China altogether by shifting some or all manufacturing to the United States, or to a third country. A product with a non-China country of origin would not be subject to the current tariffs. However, country of origin rules are not harmonized internationally and different rules may apply under free trade agreements, or the substantial transformation test. Therefore, it is important for importers to understand the applicable rules and carefully verify the country of origin when considering this option.

Finally, another approach would be to lower the dutiable value of the product upon importation to the United States through the so-called “first sale” valuation. In this scenario, U.S. importers pay duty on the price that a trading company pays the manufacturer instead of the higher price the importer pays the trading company. While the tariffs would still apply in this case, their impact would be less severe because the dutiable value would be significantly lower.

_____________________________________________________________________

Mark Ludwikowski is the leader and Courtney Taylor is an Associate of the International Trade practice of Clark Hill, PLC. They are resident in the firm’s Washington D.C. office and can be reached at 202-772-0909; mludwikowski@ClarkHill.com and cgtaylor@ClarkHill.com

Archives, Global Trade Daily, News

Globe Tracker & SeaCube for One Network Express IoT Gensets

September 12th, 2019 GT Staff Leave a comment

One Network Express (ONE) confirmed an IoT-focused partnership with SeaCube Containers and Globe Tracker to develop a genset solution through utilizing Global Tracker’s layered technology capabilities. This along with other market solutions continue the reported increase in maritime logistics IoT demand overall.

“The growing demand for greater tracking, transparency, security, diagnostics and asset fleet management using smart technology will continue to be a key driver for leased solutions. By partnering with Globe Tracker, we will continue to enhance our leading-edge technology solutions and expand our commitment to the intermodal industry by providing smart asset technology leased products,” said Greg Tuthill, Chief Commercial Officer at SeaCube.

At the center of the development of the solution remains increasing visibility with smarter tracking abilities, specifically impacting reefer fleets. The anticipated kickoff of full operations is currently scheduled for mid-September through the end of 2019.

“We are extremely pleased to be working with SeaCube in providing this best-in-class genset solution to ONE. In genset telematics, we are the only provider integrated into the micro-controller of 2 out of the 3 leading brands in North America. This provides ONE with the most robust amount of data and assists in setting maintenance intervals, reducing maintenance costs, extending asset life, monitoring fuel consumption and having full operational visibility of their genset assets,” notes John Harnett, Senior Director Marine and Intermodal at Globe Tracker.

Archives, Global Trade Daily, News

Global Hardboard Market 2019 – Manufacturing Suffers Setback Due to Demand Weakness

September 11th, 2019 IndexBox Leave a comment

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

The global hardboard market revenue amounted to $5.2B in 2018, picking up by 5.7% 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). Over the period under review, hardboard consumption, however, continues to indicate a measured shrinkage. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2011 with an increase of 17% year-to-year. Global hardboard consumption peaked at $8.5B in 2013; however, from 2014 to 2018, consumption failed to regain its momentum.

Consumption By Country

China (3.3M cubic meters) constituted the country with the largest volume of hardboard consumption, comprising approx. 35% of total consumption. Moreover, hardboard consumption in China exceeded the figures recorded by the world’s second-largest consumer, Germany (1.1M cubic meters), threefold. The third position in this ranking was occupied by Russia (474K cubic meters), with a 5% share.

From 2007 to 2018, the average annual growth rate of volume in China amounted to +8.1%. In the other countries, the average annual rates were as follows: Germany (+3.5% per year) and Russia (-2.8% per year).

In value terms, China ($1.8B) led the market, alone. The second position in the ranking was occupied by Germany ($748M). It was followed by the U.S..

The countries with the highest levels of hardboard per capita consumption in 2018 were Belarus (22 cubic meters per 1000 persons), Belgium (17 cubic meters per 1000 persons) and Germany (13 cubic meters per 1000 persons).

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

Market Forecast 2019-2025

Driven by rising demand for hardboard 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 +5.5% for the seven-year period from 2018 to 2025, which is projected to bring the market volume to 14M cubic meters by the end of 2025.

Production 2007-2018

In 2018, approx. 9.7M cubic meters of hardboard were produced worldwide; reducing by -3% against the previous year. Over the period under review, hardboard production continues to indicate a measured setback. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2011 when production volume increased by 15% year-to-year. Over the period under review, global hardboard production attained its peak figure volume at 15M cubic meters in 2013; however, from 2014 to 2018, production failed to regain its momentum.

In value terms, hardboard production totaled $5.3B in 2018 estimated in export prices. Overall, hardboard production continues to indicate a significant reduction. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2013 with an increase of 20% y-o-y. In that year, global hardboard production attained its peak level of $8.7B. From 2014 to 2018, global hardboard production growth failed to regain its momentum.

Production By Country

The countries with the highest volumes of hardboard production in 2018 were China (3.5M cubic meters), Germany (2.3M cubic meters) and Russia (418K cubic meters), with a combined 64% share of global production. Ukraine, Poland, Belarus, Brazil, the U.S. and Malaysia lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 19%.

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

Exports 2007-2018

Global exports stood at 4.3M cubic meters in 2018, reducing by -9.4% against the previous year. Over the period under review, hardboard exports continue to indicate a slight descent. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2017 with an increase of 8.5% y-o-y. Global exports peaked at 5M cubic meters in 2007; however, from 2008 to 2018, exports failed to regain their momentum.

In value terms, hardboard exports amounted to $2.5B in 2018. Overall, hardboard exports continue to indicate a moderate slump. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2013 with an increase of 10% y-o-y. Over the period under review, global hardboard exports reached their maximum at $3.2B in 2007; however, from 2008 to 2018, exports remained at a lower figure.

Exports by Country

In 2018, Germany (1.5M cubic meters) was the main exporter of hardboard, generating 36% of total exports. It was distantly followed by Poland (499K cubic meters), France (249K cubic meters), Belgium (232K cubic meters) and China (220K cubic meters), together generating a 28% share of total exports. Belarus (157K cubic meters), Brazil (122K cubic meters), Canada (113K cubic meters), Russia (112K cubic meters), Austria (101K cubic meters), Turkey (97K cubic meters) and Thailand (83K cubic meters) occupied a relatively small share of total exports.

Germany experienced a relatively flat trend pattern of hardboard exports. At the same time, Turkey (+17.3%), Belarus (+17.1%), Thailand (+9.9%) and Poland (+4.1%) displayed positive paces of growth. Moreover, Turkey emerged as the fastest growing exporter in the world, with a CAGR of +17.3% from 2007-2018. Brazil, Austria and Belgium experienced a relatively flat trend pattern. By contrast, China (-6.4%), France (-7.0%), Russia (-8.8%) and Canada (-10.4%) illustrated a downward trend over the same period. Poland (+4.2 p.p.), Belarus (+3 p.p.) and Turkey (+1.8 p.p.) significantly strengthened its position in terms of the global exports, while Germany, Russia, China, Canada and France saw its share reduced by -1.9%, -4.6%, -5.5%, -6.1% and -7.1% from 2007 to 2018, respectively. The shares of the other countries remained relatively stable throughout the analyzed period.

In value terms, Germany ($1.1B) remains the largest hardboard supplier worldwide, comprising 44% of global exports. The second position in the ranking was occupied by Poland ($257M), with a 10% share of global exports. It was followed by France, with a 5.9% share.

From 2007 to 2018, the average annual growth rate of value in Germany totaled -1.1%. In the other countries, the average annual rates were as follows: Poland (+2.7% per year) and France (-6.5% per year).

Export Prices by Country

The average hardboard export price stood at $572 per cubic meter in 2018, rising by 10% against the previous year. Over the period under review, the hardboard export price, however, continues to indicate a mild deduction. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2013 when the average export price increased by 29% y-o-y. Over the period under review, the average export prices for hardboard reached their maximum at $648 per cubic meter in 2007; however, from 2008 to 2018, export prices stood at a somewhat lower figure.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of origin; the country with the highest price was Germany ($712 per cubic meter), while Russia ($265 per cubic meter) was amongst the lowest.

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

Imports 2007-2018

Global imports amounted to 4.1M cubic meters in 2018, falling by -3.1% against the previous year. In general, hardboard imports continue to indicate a measured contraction. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2017 when Imports increased by 15% against the previous year. Over the period under review, global hardboard imports attained their maximum at 5.2M cubic meters in 2007; however, from 2008 to 2018, imports stood at a somewhat lower figure.

In value terms, hardboard imports amounted to $2.1B in 2018. Overall, hardboard imports continue to indicate a perceptible curtailment. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2011 with an increase of 9% against the previous year. Over the period under review, global hardboard imports reached their peak figure at $3.1B in 2007; however, from 2008 to 2018, imports failed to regain their momentum.

Imports by Country

The imports of the twelve major importers of hardboard, namely Belgium, France, Germany, the U.S., Poland, Russia, Romania, the UK, Canada, Italy, Australia and Lithuania, represented more than half 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 Lithuania, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, France ($164M), Belgium ($141M) and the U.S. ($139M) were the countries with the highest levels of imports in 2018, with a combined 21% share of global imports. These countries were followed by Germany, Poland, Romania, the UK, Russia, Canada, Italy, Australia and Lithuania, which together accounted for a further 32%.

Among the main importing countries, Lithuania recorded the highest rates of growth with regard to imports, over the last eleven years, while the other global leaders experienced mixed trends in the imports figures.

Import Prices by Country

In 2018, the average hardboard import price amounted to $509 per cubic meter, picking up by 6.5% against the previous year. Over the period under review, the hardboard import price, however, continues to indicate a mild descent. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2018 when the average import price increased by 6.5% against the previous year. Global import price peaked at $626 per cubic meter in 2008; however, from 2009 to 2018, import prices failed to regain their momentum.

There were significant differences in the average prices amongst the major importing countries. In 2018, the country with the highest price was Canada ($647 per cubic meter), while Belgium ($333 per cubic meter) was amongst the lowest.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by the UK, while the other global leaders experienced a decline in the import price figures.

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

Archives, Global Trade Daily, International Trade

Global Whole Fresh Milk Market 2019 – Output is Driven by Increasing Demand in India, Turkey, the EU, and the U.S.

September 11th, 2019 IndexBox Leave a comment

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

The global whole fresh milk market is estimated at $798.4B in 2018, an increase of 1.7% from 2017. 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 +2.5% from 2007 to 2018; the trend pattern remained consistent, with somewhat noticeable fluctuations being observed throughout the analyzed period. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2010 with an increase of 8.8% year-to-year. Over the period under review, the global whole fresh milk market attained its maximum level in 2018 and is expected to retain its growth in the near future.

Consumption By Country

The countries with the highest volumes of whole fresh milk consumption in 2018 were India (185M tonnes), the U.S. (99M tonnes) and Pakistan (46M tonnes), with a combined 39% share of global consumption. These countries were followed by Brazil, China, Germany, Russia, France, New Zealand, Turkey, the Netherlands and the UK, which together accounted for a further 28%.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of whole fresh milk consumption, amongst the main consuming countries, was attained by Turkey, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, the largest whole fresh milk markets worldwide were India ($140.3B), the U.S. ($87.4B) and Brazil ($67.7B), together accounting for 37% of the global market. These countries were followed by Pakistan, New Zealand, China, Russia, Germany, Turkey, France, the Netherlands and the UK, which together accounted for a further 27%.

In 2018, the highest levels of whole fresh milk per capita consumption was registered in New Zealand (4,626 kg per person), followed by the Netherlands (877 kg per person), Germany (417 kg per person) and France (384 kg per person), while the world average per capita consumption of whole fresh milk was estimated at 110 kg per person.

From 2007 to 2018, the average annual rate of growth in terms of the whole fresh milk per capita consumption in New Zealand totaled +2.1%. The remaining consuming countries recorded the following average annual rates of per capita consumption growth: the Netherlands (+2.4% per year) and Germany (+1.8% per year).

Market Forecast 2019-2025

Driven by increasing demand for whole fresh milk worldwide, the market is expected to continue an upward consumption trend over the next seven years. Market performance is forecast to retain its current trend pattern, expanding with an anticipated CAGR of +1.6% for the seven-year period from 2018 to 2025, which is projected to bring the market volume to 946M tonnes by the end of 2025.

Production 2007-2018

In 2018, approx. 846M tonnes of whole fresh milk were produced worldwide; increasing by 2.2% against the previous year. The total output volume increased at an average annual rate of +1.9% from 2007 to 2018; the trend pattern remained consistent, with only minor fluctuations being observed throughout the analyzed period. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2014 with an increase of 3.4% y-o-y. The global whole fresh milk production peaked in 2018 and is expected to retain its growth in the near future. The general positive trend in terms of whole fresh milk output was largely conditioned by a modest increase of the number of producing animals and a relatively flat trend pattern in yield figures.

In value terms, whole fresh milk production amounted to $780.5B in 2018 estimated in export prices. The total output value increased at an average annual rate of +2.5% from 2007 to 2018; the trend pattern remained relatively stable, with somewhat noticeable fluctuations being recorded over the period under review.

Production By Country

The countries with the highest volumes of whole fresh milk production in 2018 were India (185M tonnes), the U.S. (99M tonnes) and Pakistan (46M tonnes), with a combined 39% share of global production. Brazil, China, Germany, Russia, France, New Zealand, Turkey, the UK and the Netherlands lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 27%.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of whole fresh milk production, amongst the main producing countries, was attained by Turkey, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Producing Animals 2007-2018

In 2018, the global number of animals for whole fresh milk output amounted to 821M heads, rising by 1.7% against the previous year. This number increased at an average annual rate of +1.4% over the period from 2007 to 2018; the trend pattern remained consistent, with somewhat noticeable fluctuations throughout the analyzed period. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2009 when the number of producing animals increased by 3.3% y-o-y. The global number of animals for whole fresh milk production peaked in 2018 and is likely to continue its growth in the near future.

Yield 2007-2018

In 2018, the global average yield for whole fresh milk output stood at 1 tonne per head, remaining stable against the previous year. In general, the whole fresh milk yield continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2014 with an increase of 2.7% y-o-y. The global whole fresh milk yield peaked in 2018 and is expected to retain its growth in the immediate term.

Exports 2007-2018

Global exports amounted to 10M tonnes in 2018, reducing by -11.5% against the previous year. The total export volume increased at an average annual rate of +2.4% over the period from 2007 to 2018; however, the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded in certain years. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2008 when exports increased by 13% against the previous year. Over the period under review, global whole fresh milk exports reached their maximum at 11M tonnes in 2017, and then declined slightly in the following year.

In value terms, whole fresh milk exports stood at $6.9B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. The total export value increased at an average annual rate of +2.0% from 2007 to 2018; however, the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2011 when exports increased by 26% y-o-y. Over the period under review, global whole fresh milk exports attained their peak figure at $8.6B in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, exports failed to regain their momentum.

Exports by Country

In 2018, Germany (1.4M tonnes), followed by the Czech Republic (855K tonnes), the UK (822K tonnes), Belgium (746K tonnes), the Netherlands (741K tonnes), France (698K tonnes), Poland (606K tonnes) and Austria (582K tonnes) were the major exporters of whole fresh milk, together achieving 65% of total exports. The following exporters – Latvia (340K tonnes), Hungary (316K tonnes), Slovenia (284K tonnes) and Luxembourg (253K tonnes) – each recorded a 12% 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 whole fresh milk markets worldwide were Germany ($976M), the Netherlands ($715M) and Belgium ($664M), together comprising 34% of global exports. These countries were followed by France, Poland, the UK, the Czech Republic, Austria, Hungary, Latvia, Luxembourg and Slovenia, which together accounted for a further 37%.

Among the main exporting countries, Poland recorded the highest growth rate of exports, over the last eleven-year period, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Export Prices by Country

The average whole fresh milk export price stood at $696 per tonne in 2018, approximately reflecting the previous year. In general, the whole fresh milk export price, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2013 an increase of 14% year-to-year. In that year, the average export prices for whole fresh milk reached their peak level of $811 per tonne. From 2014 to 2018, the growth in terms of the average export prices for whole fresh milk remained at a somewhat lower figure.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of origin; the country with the highest price was the Netherlands ($965 per tonne), while Latvia ($377 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2007 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. 11M tonnes of whole fresh milk were imported worldwide; falling by -5.3% against the previous year. The total import volume increased at an average annual rate of +3.5% from 2007 to 2018; however, the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded over the period under review. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2008 with an increase of 14% year-to-year. Over the period under review, global whole fresh milk imports attained their peak figure at 12M tonnes in 2017, and then declined slightly in the following year.

In value terms, whole fresh milk imports stood at $8.2B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. The total import value increased at an average annual rate of +3.5% from 2007 to 2018; however, the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded over the period under review. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2017 with an increase of 27% year-to-year. The global imports peaked at $8.6B in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, imports stood at a somewhat lower figure.

Imports by Country

In 2018, Germany (2.5M tonnes), distantly followed by Italy (1.2M tonnes), Belgium (914K tonnes), the Netherlands (803K tonnes), Ireland (764K tonnes) and China (580K tonnes) were the largest importers of whole fresh milk, together making up 61% of total imports. Lithuania (480K tonnes), France (363K tonnes), Russia (238K tonnes), Croatia (206K tonnes), Poland (187K tonnes) and Romania (184K tonnes) occupied a minor share of total imports.

From 2007 to 2018, average annual rates of growth with regard to whole fresh milk imports into Germany stood at +5.7%. At the same time, China (+57.8%), Croatia (+21.9%), Poland (+13.7%), Romania (+13.1%), Lithuania (+11.4%), Ireland (+10.6%), Russia (+6.5%), the Netherlands (+6.1%) and Belgium (+1.9%) displayed positive paces of growth. Moreover, China emerged as the fastest-growing importer in the world, with a CAGR of +57.8% from 2007-2018.

By contrast, France (-1.5%) and Italy (-3.1%) illustrated a downward trend over the same period. From 2007 to 2018, the share of Germany, China, Ireland, the Netherlands, Lithuania, Croatia and Belgium increased by +10%, +5.2%, +4.6%, +3.5%, +3%, +1.6% and +1.5% percentage points, while Italy (-4.4 p.p.) saw their share reduced. The shares of the other countries remained relatively stable throughout the analyzed period.

In value terms, Germany ($1.5B), China ($747M) and Italy ($733M) appeared to be the countries with the highest levels of imports in 2018, together comprising 36% of global imports.

In terms of the main importing countries, China (+54.0% per year) recorded the highest growth rate of imports, over the last eleven years, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Import Prices by Country

In 2018, the average whole fresh milk import price amounted to $735 per tonne, picking up by 4.7% against the previous year. Over the period under review, the whole fresh milk import price, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2017 when the average import price increased by 16% year-to-year. The global import price peaked at $802 per tonne in 2013; however, from 2014 to 2018, import prices 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 France ($1,584 per tonne), while Lithuania ($383 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

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

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

Archives, Commentary, Global Trade Daily

How Small Steps Can Drive Big Results For Your Business

September 10th, 2019 Shawn Burcham Leave a comment

In business, it’s the major leaps that people notice and remember.

Apple introduced the iPhone and the methods in which we communicate and gather information were changed forever. LEGO took some audacious steps over the last couple of decades and expanded its toy franchise into video games, TV and movies.

Big steps. Big results.

But not every move you make with your business or in your personal life needs to be of earth-shattering significance, says Shawn Burcham (www.shawnburcham.com), founder and CEO of PFSbrands and author of Keeping Score with GRITT: Straight Talk Strategies for Success.

Sometimes, it’s the small steps that eventually lead to big rewards.

“One example with my own company is that there was a time when I didn’t believe in meetings,” Burcham says. “I thought they were a waste of time, probably because most of the meetings I had been in had indeed been a waste.”

But as his business grew, Burcham realized meetings are a necessity for communicating within a large organization. So, PFSbrands took the “small step” of instituting regularly scheduled meetings, which he says have been critical to accomplishing personal, departmental, and company-wide goals.

Burcham offers a few more examples of small steps that can pay big dividends for you and your business:

Make a habit of setting goals. “It may seem like a basic thing, but setting goals is crucial to success both personally and professionally,” Burcham says. “Everyone in your company should be setting goals, and regularly reviewing those goals and checking their progress.” Sounds easy enough, but this is one small step that many people don’t take. “That’s why just the act of setting goals already gives you a competitive advantage,” he says.

Write down those goals. Setting goals is a good first step, but don’t just memorize them, Burcham says. Write them down because studies have shown that people who do that are more likely to achieve what they are after than people without written goals.

Build an accountability system. One of the best ways to make sure you follow through on your goals is to create a network of people who will hold you accountable, Burcham says. If no one knows you set a goal, it’s easy to let it slide. But if there are people who know about your goal, and better yet are depending on you to accomplish it, then you are more likely to follow through. In a business, it’s good for everyone to know everyone else’s goals and every department’s goals. That way, Burcham says, you can all hold each other accountable.

Stop trying to do everything. Burcham suggests asking yourself what duties you can pass on to others because those activities are not a productive use of time and energy for you or for the company. “I’ve often made the mistake of hanging onto responsibilities far longer than necessary; everything from accounting, to email management, to sales management,” he says. As a company grows, Burcham says, that small step of finding things you can stop doing will be crucial to success.

“While each of these individually may be a small step, they are all important for personal growth and your business’ success,” Burcham says. “If you don’t set goals, write them down, and work to improve, you’ll likely be the exact same person 12 months from now. There’s nothing necessarily wrong with that. Being who you are is okay, but the question is: Are you content with being the same? Or do you want to be better?”

_______________________________________________________________

Shawn Burcham (www.shawnburcham.com), author of Keeping Score with GRITT: Straight Talk Strategies for Success, is the founder & CEO of PFSbrands, which he and his wife, Julie, started out of their home in 1998. The company has over 1,500 branded foodservice locations across 40 states and is best known for their Champs Chicken franchise brand which was started in 1999. Prior to starting PFSbrands, Burcham spent five years with a Fortune 100 company, Mid-America Dairymen (now Dairy Farmers of America). He also worked for three years as a Regional Sales Manager for a midwest Chester’s Fried chicken distributor.

Archives, Global Trade Daily, International Trade

WAVE OF GLOBAL SAND TRADE MAY BE DEPLETING BEACHES

September 9th, 2019 Lauren Kyger Leave a comment

Not just sand castles

It’s September, which officially marks the end of summer. Kids have headed back to school and the sandcastles are long since washed away from the shore. But you’re never really far from the beach. It’s actually all around you since most of the infrastructure in your homes, schools and offices is made of sand.

Sand is a critical component in many of the products we depend on every day: glass, concrete, asphalt, computer chips, and more. We use up to 50 billion tons of it every year, making it the second-largest resource extracted and traded by volume each year, behind water. Despite our necessity for sand, there are no international conventions that specifically regulate the extraction, use and trade of land-based sand. As demand outpaces supply, shortages have even led to illicit trade in sand in some regions of the world.

The many uses of sand

Sand is made of rocks that have eroded over thousands of years. There are many different types of sand and each has its own purpose. Sand from riverbeds is the most desired for construction materials like cement and asphalt. Silica sand from quartz is used for glass, ceramics and electronics. Marine sand is used for land reclamation. The list goes on.

Sand is also pivotal for oil and gas companies for hydraulic fracking. Oil companies mix silica sand (also called “frac sand”) with water and shoot it into shale rocks to break them apart and access the oil and natural gas inside. Companies recently discovered that using more silica sand makes the fracking process more efficient. This has led to increased U.S. consumption of industrial sand and gravel, up 13 percent to 110 million tons consumed in 2018.

Despite increased consumption of sand, the United States is still the world’s top exporter, responsible for nearly 30 percent of the world’s natural sand exports in 2018. Top destinations for U.S. sand exports include Canada, China, Japan and Mexico.

As cities grow, so does demand for sand

Demand for sand is expected to increase in the coming years, especially in developing countries faced with increasing populations, urbanization and economic growth. Nearly two-thirds of global cement production happens in China and India, reflecting their rapidly urbanizing populations. China alone produced more cement last year than the rest of the world combined.

In the past, sand trade has stayed mostly regional because it’s heavy to transport. But in the coming years, as demand outpaces supply, international trade in sand is forecasted to grow at 5.5 percent each year, according to the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). Resource-constrained countries will be particularly dependent on sand imports to meet the needs of their rapidly growing urban areas.

Singapore is the world’s largest sand importer, importing an estimated 517 million tons of sand over the last 20 years. Most of this sand came from its Southeast Asian neighbors including Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and Cambodia. Singapore has used this sand to increase its land area by 20 percent over the last 40 years, but Singapore’s thirst for sand has led to tensions in the region.

According to the UNEP, sand exports to Singapore were reportedly responsible for the disappearance of 24 Indonesian sand islands. Indonesia formally banned sand exports to Singapore in 2007. In the last two years, Cambodia and Malaysia have also banned sea sand exports citing environmental concerns. Malaysia’s 2018 ban will likely have a big impact on Singapore, since Malaysia was the source for 96 percent of Singapore’s sand imports last year.

Another top importer of sand in the region is the United Arab Emirates, which is surprising given its prime desert location. Desert sand, however, is not useable for construction purposes since desert winds make it too fine and smooth. The UAE is thus dependent on sand imports to continue making roads, buildings and other infrastructure in Dubai. The UAE imported over two million tons of natural sand in 2018, according to the International Trade Centre.

Sand mafias are stealing entire beaches

The growing need for sand has led to illicit sand trade and “sand mafias” in developing and emerging economies across the world. Stories abound of beaches disappearing overnight, rivers drying up and more.

In Morocco, an estimated 10 million cubic meters per year— about half the sand the country uses— is illegally stripped from its coast. The erosion has caused serious issues for the country’s tourism sector, as many buildings are now at risk from beach erosion due to illegal sand mining.

“Sand mafias” are another example of the perils of the illegal sand trade. Due to the increasing price of sand, organized crime surrounding it is also thriving, according to the UNEP. Activists who speak out against these sand mafias that illegally strip river beds and coasts in countries like India have been threatened and even killed, the organization says.

Likes grains in an hourglass

We may take sand for granted, but we’re extracting it far faster than nature can replenish it. Most major rivers across the world have already lost between 50 and 95 percent of their natural sand and gravel, the UNEP says. Matters are made worse by irrigation and hydroelectricity dams, which also reduce the natural amount of sediment flowing in rivers. These factors can cause serious environmental issues, including erosion, pollution, flooding and droughts.

Despite its importance worldwide, sand is one of the least regulated resources today. There are no international conventions regulating the extraction, use or that specifically govern trade in land-based sand. Rules for sand extraction are largely written at the national and regional levels, leading to a variation of standards and different levels of enforcement across the world.

The UNEP is trying to change this by calling on international organizations, national governments, private sector companies, civil society groups and local communities to come together and have a global conversation on sand extraction. As the world’s sand grains continue to slip quickly through the hourglass, the time for that conversation should be sooner rather than later.

______________________________________________________________

Lauren Kyger is Associate Editor for TradeVistas. Prior to joining TradeVistas, she was a Research Associate at the Hinrich Foundation focused on international trade issues. She is a Hinrich Foundation Global Trade Leader Scholar alumna, earning her Master’s degree in Global Business Journalism from Tsinghua University in Beijing. She received her Bachelor’s degree from the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Arizona State University.

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

Archives, Global Trade Daily, Software

THIS TINY CHIP IS PLAYING A BIG ROLE IN THE TRADE WAR

September 9th, 2019 Andrea Durkin Leave a comment

Small and mighty

In one of the most successful branding campaigns, “Intel Inside” helped us all become aware that semiconductors are the brains behind modern consumer electronics in our computers, in our mobile phones, in our televisions and in our cars. It’s wondrous such power begins life as grains of sand (and other pure elements). The silicon in sand is purified and melted into solid cylinders that get sliced into one-millimeter thick wafer discs. The discs are polished, printed with circuit designs, and cut into the tiny individual semiconductor chips that get embedded into our devices.

The next generation of smarter and more powerful machines will rely on even more sophisticated semiconductors to achieve new capabilities. The pace of change is dizzying. Pressure is on to “win” in the global chip race, which is why efforts to protect innovations in chipmaking are front and center in the current trade war – for better and for worse.

Strength in numbers

The American semiconductor industry dominates the field with close to half of the global market share. Some industry leaders thrive by maintaining a high degree of vertical integration, but most have achieved a competitive edge by developing reliable value chains that leverage industry clusters located in different regions, while also tapping into the expertise of thousands of small, niche firms inside and outside the United States.

Some firms focus on supplying raw materials or manufacturing equipment, others create “intellectual property cores” or the building blocks for chips, or cultivate skilled engineers who lay out the circuitry of chips. Closer to the end users are companies that have achieved efficiencies in manufacturing, assembling, testing, packaging and distributing semiconductors.

According to the Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA), Canada, European countries and the United States are leaders in semiconductor design and high-end manufacturing. Japan, the United States and some European countries are main sources for equipment and raw materials. China, Taiwan, Malaysia and others in the Asia-Pacific tend to concentrate in the manufacturing, assembling, testing and packaging segment of the industry. R&D hubs are spread across the world.

One American company might have over 7,000 suppliers across almost every state and also have another 8,500 suppliers outside the United States. In creating strategic value chains, American companies can invest in R&D to advance the science while keeping production costs down.

China’s growing chip army

The Trump administration approaches trade with China through the lens of national security as well as economic preeminence. As the Economist rightly points out, in this clash of economic titans, “the chip industry is where America’s industrial leadership and China’s superpower ambitions clash most directly.”

China currently spends as much on imported semiconductors every year as it does imports of crude oil. Importing semiconductors was crucial to China’s ascendance as an assembler of telecommunications equipment, computers, displays, monitors and a variety of electronic components that China exports around the world.

But it’s high-end semiconductor development and manufacturing that China has its eye on now as the foundation for sustained economic growth and military might. Under its “Made in China 2025” strategy, the Chinese government set a goal to supply 40 percent of its own semiconductor needs by 2020, increasing to 70 percent by 2025.

Enlisting the big guns

U.S. firms spend twice as much on R&D as their Chinese counterparts – 17.4 percent of sales versus 8.4 percent. How to counter? Pull out some big funding guns. China’s Ministry of Science & Technology orchestrated the $800 million Hou An Innovation Fund to acquire technologies to help its industry semiconductor industry leapfrog. The fund purchased a controlling stake in the world’s leading developer of semiconductor IP blocks. The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology also built a $31.7 billion war chest, even opening its China Integrated Circuit Industry Investment Fund to foreign investors.

According to Price Waterhouse Coopers, China has gone from 16 integrated circuit design firms in 1990 to 664 in 2014. Chinese wafer production firms tripled over a similar span, and the number of testing and packaging firms has increased by 50 percent. E-commerce giant, Alibaba, acquired in-house capacity to design semiconductors tailored for artificial intelligence in a bid to compete with Microsoft and Google. Baidu, Huawei and other major Chinese firms are also enlisted soldiers in the fight.

Secret Weapons

Powerful chips are critical for any industry that relies on collecting, managing and computing with data – and that includes the defense industry. Our most sophisticated defense weapons depend on them. The U.S. Department of Defense has a strategy for “Microelectronics Innovation for National Security and Economic Competitiveness.” The U.S. government has imposed billions in tariffs on imports from China to generate leverage in negotiating an agreement to crackdown on forced technology transfers and theft of intellectual property. But it is also deploying other tools to control U.S. exports of critical technologies, another avenue for China to access U.S. innovation.

The U.S. government has proposed expanding its list of “emerging and foundational technologies” (microprocessors for example) deemed essential to national security that would be subject to licensing under the Export Administration Regulations before U.S. companies could export them. Also under review is the Commerce Control List (CCL) to assess any changes that should be made to controls on items to embargoed destinations, which may include China.

The Commerce and Justice Departments have visibly stepped up enforcement and applied existing authorities in novel ways against Chinese companies that might steal technology. In November last year, the Department of Justice announced it would proactively investigate and prosecute Chinese companies for alleged trade secret theft and economic espionage. The announcement was swiftly followed by an indictment of Fujian Jinhua Integrated Circuit Company, Ltd., a state-owned Chinese semiconductor manufacturer, for alleged crimes related to a conspiracy to possess and convey the stolen trade secrets of Micron Technology, Inc., an American semiconductor company. The Commerce Department added Fujian Jinhua to the list of entities to which U.S. companies cannot sell without obtaining a license.

The United States is not alone in applying policies designed to prevent technology transfer to Chinese companies either through export or acquisition. Taiwan and South Korea have done the same. Foreign firms are also wary of violating U.S. laws. According to Reuters, Japan’s Tokyo Electron, the world’s third-largest supplier of semiconductor manufacturing equipment, announced in June it would not supply to Chinese firms on a U.S. list.

On the front lines

The Administration’s tariff war is leaving almost no industry or product untouched, affecting semiconductors, semiconductor manufacturing equipment, raw materials, printed circuit boards, and a variety of other products in the industry’s supply chain. American semiconductors often criss-cross the globe during production, so U.S. firms might end up paying this import tax on its own product — not to mention the higher costs of tariffs on the consumer products that run on semiconductors.

While supportive of the administration’s goals, the U.S. semiconductor industry has urged a balanced approach that will protect its intellectual assets from theft and preserve U.S. national security while not unduly hamstringing innovation and growth that is in part derived from international collaboration.

Current technologies and methods of fabrication proprietary to incumbent firms keep them in the lead, for now. But in the near future, chips will run on light rather than electricity. Artificial intelligence and quantum computing will be applied to gain computing speed. Breakthroughs like these will determine who are the future industry leaders, and China has an opportunity to gain entry on the ground floor of those frontiers.

_____________________________________________________________

Andrea Durkin is the Editor-in-Chief of TradeVistas and Founder of Sparkplug, LLC. Ms. Durkin previously served as a U.S. Government trade negotiator and has proudly taught international trade policy and negotiations for the last fourteen years as an Adjunct Professor at Georgetown University’s Master of Science in Foreign Service program.

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

Archives, Global Trade Daily, Imports/Exports

Global Plywood Market 2019 – The Industry Desperately Needs New Growth Drivers

September 9th, 2019 IndexBox Leave a comment

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

The global plywood industry is currently affected by the US-China trade war and the slowdown of China’s economy. In 2018, its market size was estimated at $73.9B, surging by 2.6% 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).

Over the period under review, plywood consumption continues to indicate a buoyant increase. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2014 with an increase of 34% y-o-y. Over the period under review, the global plywood market reached its peak figure level at $93.9B in 2015; however, from 2016 to 2018, consumption remained at a lower figure.

Consumption By Country

China (101M cubic meters) remains the largest plywood consuming country worldwide, accounting for 64% of total consumption. Moreover, plywood consumption in China exceeded the figures recorded by the world’s second-largest consumer, the U.S. (16M cubic meters), sixfold. The third position in this ranking was occupied by Japan (6.2M cubic meters), with a 3.9% share.

In China, plywood consumption increased at an average annual rate of +9.7% over the period from 2007-2018. In the other countries, the average annual rates were as follows: the U.S. (-0.4% per year) and Japan (+4.5% per year).

In value terms, China ($45.8B) led the market, alone. The second position in the ranking was occupied by the U.S. ($7.3B). It was followed by Japan.

The countries with the highest levels of plywood per capita consumption in 2018 were Canada (71 cubic meters per 1000 persons), China (70 cubic meters per 1000 persons) and Japan (49 cubic meters per 1000 persons).

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

Production 2007-2018

In 2018, approx. 160M cubic meters of plywood were produced worldwide; approximately equating the previous year. Over the period under review, the total output indicated strong growth from 2007 to 2018: its volume increased at an average annual rate of +4.9% over the last eleven-year period. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, plywood production decreased by -2.8% against 2016 indices. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2011 with an increase of 16% y-o-y. Over the period under review, global plywood production reached its peak figure volume at 165M cubic meters in 2016; however, from 2017 to 2018, production remained at a lower figure.

In value terms, plywood production amounted to $72.7B in 2018 estimated in export prices. Over the period under review, plywood production continues to indicate prominent growth. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2014 when production volume increased by 46% y-o-y. The global plywood production peaked at $101.4B in 2015; however, from 2016 to 2018, production failed to regain its momentum.

Production By Country

China (113M cubic meters) remains the largest plywood producing country worldwide, accounting for 71% of total production. Moreover, plywood production in China exceeded the figures recorded by the world’s second-largest producer, the U.S. (11M cubic meters), tenfold. The third position in this ranking was occupied by Russia (4M cubic meters), with a 2.5% share.

From 2007 to 2018, the average annual growth rate of volume in China totaled +8.8%. In the other countries, the average annual rates were as follows: the U.S. (-0.7% per year) and Russia (+3.4% per year).

Exports 2007-2018

Global exports stood at 34M cubic meters in 2018, rising by 4.7% against the previous year. Over the period under review, plywood exports, however, continue to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2010 with an increase of 39% year-to-year. Over the period under review, global plywood exports attained their maximum at 34M cubic meters in 2007; however, from 2008 to 2018, exports stood at a somewhat lower figure.

In value terms, plywood exports amounted to $15.8B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. The total export value increased at an average annual rate of +2.0% from 2007 to 2018; however, the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2010 when exports increased by 30% year-to-year. Over the period under review, global plywood exports reached their maximum at $16.5B in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, exports remained at a lower figure.

Exports by Country

In 2018, China (12M cubic meters) was the key exporter of plywood, creating 36% of total exports. It was distantly followed by Russia (3.6M cubic meters), Indonesia (2.8M cubic meters), Brazil (2.6M cubic meters) and Malaysia (2.2M cubic meters), together creating a 33% share of total exports. Finland (1.1M cubic meters), Chile (1.1M cubic meters), Viet Nam (735K cubic meters), the U.S. (699K cubic meters), Germany (628K cubic meters) and Canada (548K cubic meters) took a minor share of total exports.

Exports from China increased at an average annual rate of +3.7% from 2007 to 2018. At the same time, Viet Nam (+25.1%), the U.S. (+3.8%), Russia (+3.7%), Chile (+1.6%) and Germany (+1.4%) displayed positive paces of growth. Moreover, Viet Nam emerged as the fastest-growing exporter in the world, with a CAGR of +25.1% from 2007-2018. Canada and Finland experienced a relatively flat trend pattern. By contrast, Brazil (-1.9%), Indonesia (-2.6%) and Malaysia (-9.6%) illustrated a downward trend over the same period. From 2007 to 2018, the share of China, Russia and Viet Nam increased by +12%, +3.4% and +2% percentage points, while Brazil (-1.8 p.p.), Indonesia (-2.7 p.p.) and Malaysia (-13.1 p.p.) saw their share reduced. The shares of the other countries remained relatively stable throughout the analyzed period.

In value terms, China ($5.4B) remains the largest plywood supplier worldwide, comprising 34% of global exports. The second position in the ranking was occupied by Indonesia ($1.7B), with a 11% share of global exports. It was followed by Russia, with a 8.7% share.

In China, plywood exports increased at an average annual rate of +4.0% over the period from 2007-2018. In the other countries, the average annual rates were as follows: Indonesia (+1.4% per year) and Russia (+6.1% per year).

Export Prices by Country

In 2018, the average plywood export price amounted to $459 per cubic meter, rising by 1.9% against the previous year. Over the period from 2007 to 2018, it increased at an average annual rate of +2.1%. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2014 when the average export price increased by 19% y-o-y. In that year, the average export prices for plywood attained their peak level of $594 per cubic meter. From 2015 to 2018, the growth in terms of the average export prices for plywood failed to regain its momentum.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of origin; the country with the highest price was Indonesia ($609 per cubic meter), while Brazil ($293 per cubic meter) was amongst the lowest.

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

Imports 2007-2018

In 2018, the amount of plywood imported worldwide amounted to 32M cubic meters, surging by 5.2% against the previous year. The total import volume increased at an average annual rate of +1.9% from 2007 to 2018; however, the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2010 when imports increased by 31% against the previous year. The global imports peaked in 2018 and are likely to see steady growth in the near future.

In value terms, plywood imports amounted to $14.9B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. The total import value increased at an average annual rate of +2.8% over the period from 2007 to 2018; however, the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded in certain years. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2010 with an increase of 29% against the previous year. Over the period under review, global plywood imports reached their peak figure in 2018 and are expected to retain its growth in the immediate term.

Imports by Country

In 2018, the U.S. (4.8M cubic meters), followed by Japan (3M cubic meters), the UK (1.7M cubic meters), Germany (1.7M cubic meters) and South Korea (1.5M cubic meters) were the key importers of plywood, together achieving 40% of total imports. The Philippines (1.1M cubic meters), the United Arab Emirates (950K cubic meters), Canada (939K cubic meters), the Netherlands (875K cubic meters), Egypt (853K cubic meters), Saudi Arabia (788K cubic meters) and Mexico (786K cubic meters) followed a long way behind the leaders.

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

In value terms, the U.S. ($2.5B), Japan ($1.7B) and Germany ($883M) appeared to be the countries with the highest levels of imports in 2018, together accounting for 34% of global imports. These countries were followed by South Korea, the UK, the Netherlands, Canada, Egypt, Mexico, the Philippines, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, which together accounted for a further 28%.

The Philippines experienced the highest growth rate of imports, among the main importing countries over the last eleven-year period, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Import Prices by Country

The average plywood import price stood at $473 per cubic meter in 2018, approximately reflecting the previous year. In general, the plywood import price, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2008 an increase of 16% against the previous year. The global import price peaked at $583 per cubic meter in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, import prices failed to regain their momentum.

There were significant differences in the average prices amongst the major importing countries. In 2018, the country with the highest price was Japan ($576 per cubic meter), while Saudi Arabia ($229 per cubic meter) 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

Archives, Global Trade Daily, International Trade

Asia’s Cotton Fabric Market – China Still Dominates Exports, Despite a Raging Trade War

September 6th, 2019 IndexBox Leave a comment

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

The revenue of the cotton fabric market in Asia amounted to $43.9B in 2018, increasing by 2% 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). Overall, cotton fabric consumption continues to indicate a measured drop. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2015 when the market value increased by 6.4% against the previous year. The level of cotton fabric consumption peaked at $57.9B in 2009; however, from 2010 to 2018, consumption remained at a lower figure.

Consumption By Country in Asia

China (1.9B square meters) remains the largest cotton fabric consuming country in Asia, accounting for 32% of total consumption. Moreover, cotton fabric consumption in China exceeded the figures recorded by the region’s second-largest consumer, Bangladesh (869M square meters), twofold. The third position in this ranking was occupied by Turkey (819M square meters), with a 13% share.

From 2007 to 2018, the average annual rate of growth in terms of volume in China totaled -1.6%. In the other countries, the average annual rates were as follows: Bangladesh (+15.7% per year) and Turkey (-0.4% per year).

In value terms, the largest cotton fabric markets in Asia were China ($13B), India ($9.7B) and Bangladesh ($4.9B), with a combined 63% share of the total market.

The countries with the highest levels of cotton fabric per capita consumption in 2018 were Turkey (9,988 square meters per 1000 persons), Bangladesh (5,219 square meters per 1000 persons) and Viet Nam (2,483 square meters per 1000 persons).

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of cotton fabric per capita consumption, amongst the main consuming countries, was attained by Bangladesh, while the other leaders experienced a decline in the per capita consumption figures.

Production in Asia

In 2018, the production of woven fabrics of cotton in Asia totaled 6.2B square meters, going down by -4.2% against the previous year. Overall, cotton fabric production continues to indicate a measured deduction. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2015 when production volume increased by 10% against the previous year. The volume of cotton fabric production peaked at 8.2B square meters in 2010; however, from 2011 to 2018, production stood at a somewhat lower figure.

In value terms, cotton fabric production stood at $46.9B in 2018 estimated in export prices. Over the period under review, cotton fabric production continues to indicate a mild decrease. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2015 with an increase of 5.9% year-to-year. Over the period under review, cotton fabric production attained its peak figure level at $59.6B in 2008; however, from 2009 to 2018, production failed to regain its momentum.

Production By Country in Asia

China (3.1B square meters) remains the largest cotton fabric producing country in Asia, accounting for 50% of total production. Moreover, cotton fabric production in China exceeded the figures recorded by the region’s second-largest producer, Turkey (833M square meters), fourfold. The third position in this ranking was occupied by India (792M square meters), with a 13% share.

In China, cotton fabric production remained relatively stable over the period from 2007-2018. In the other countries, the average annual rates were as follows: Turkey (+0.1% per year) and India (-5.8% per year).

Exports in Asia

In 2018, the exports of woven fabrics of cotton in Asia totaled 2.2B square meters, leveling off at the previous year. Overall, cotton fabric exports continue to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2010 with an increase of 44% against the previous year. Over the period under review, cotton fabric exports attained their maximum at 2.8B square meters in 2012; however, from 2013 to 2018, exports stood at a somewhat lower figure.

In value terms, cotton fabric exports stood at $15.6B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. In general, cotton fabric exports continue to indicate a slight reduction. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2010 when exports increased by 23% y-o-y. The level of exports peaked at $22.8B in 2012; however, from 2013 to 2018, exports remained at a lower figure.

Exports by Country

In 2018, China (1.2B square meters) was the major exporter of woven fabrics of cotton, making up 56% of total exports. It was distantly followed by Pakistan (422M square meters), India (118M square meters) and Turkey (109M square meters), together generating a 29% share of total exports. China, Hong Kong SAR (97M square meters) followed a long way behind the leaders.

Exports from China increased at an average annual rate of +2.9% from 2007 to 2018. At the same time, Pakistan emerged as the fastest-growing exporter in Asia, with a CAGR of +5.9% from 2007-2018. India and Turkey experienced a relatively flat trend pattern. By contrast, China, Hong Kong SAR (-13.6%) illustrated a downward trend over the same period. From 2007 to 2018, the share of China and Pakistan increased by +15% and +8.9% percentage points, while China, Hong Kong SAR (-17.7 p.p.) saw their share reduced. The shares of the other countries remained relatively stable throughout the analyzed period.

In value terms, China ($7.9B) remains the largest cotton fabric supplier in Asia, comprising 51% of total cotton fabric exports. The second position in the ranking was occupied by Pakistan ($2.2B), with a 14% share of total exports. It was followed by India, with a 12% share.

In China, cotton fabric exports remained relatively stable over the period from 2007-2018. The remaining exporting countries recorded the following average annual rates of exports growth: Pakistan (+1.1% per year) and India (+6.2% per year).

Export Prices by Country

The cotton fabric export price in Asia stood at $7,047 per thousand square meters in 2018, going up by 9.8% against the previous year. Overall, the cotton fabric export price, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2011 when the export price increased by 12% against the previous year. The level of export price peaked at $8,452 per thousand square meters in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, export prices remained at a lower figure.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of origin; the country with the highest price was India ($15,533 per thousand square meters), while Pakistan ($5,150 per thousand square meters) was amongst the lowest.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by India, while the other leaders experienced mixed trends in the export price figures.

Imports in Asia

In 2018, approx. 2.1B square meters of woven fabrics of cotton were imported in Asia; increasing by 4.9% against the previous year. The total import volume increased at an average annual rate of +2.1% over the period from 2007 to 2018; however, the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded in certain years. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2017 when imports increased by 42% year-to-year. Over the period under review, cotton fabric imports attained their peak figure in 2018 and are likely to continue its growth in the near future.

In value terms, cotton fabric imports stood at $11.8B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. The total import value increased at an average annual rate of +1.2% over the period from 2007 to 2018; however, the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2010 when imports increased by 36% against the previous year. The level of imports peaked at $13.8B in 2011; however, from 2012 to 2018, imports remained at a lower figure.

Imports by Country

Bangladesh represented the major importer of woven fabrics of cotton in Asia, with the volume of imports reaching 873M square meters, which was near 42% of total imports in 2018. Viet Nam (257M square meters) held a 12% share (based on tonnes) of total imports, which put it in second place, followed by China, Hong Kong SAR (5.1%), Indonesia (5%), Cambodia (5%) and Turkey (4.5%). China (94M square meters), Sri Lanka (72M square meters), South Korea (65M square meters), Thailand (43M square meters), the United Arab Emirates (37M square meters) and Japan (36M square meters) took a little share of total imports.

From 2007 to 2018, average annual rates of growth with regard to cotton fabric imports into Bangladesh stood at +15.3%. Cambodia (+20.8%), Viet Nam (+13.7%), Indonesia (+9.6%) and the United Arab Emirates (+3.2%) also displayed positive paces of growth. Moreover, Cambodia emerged as the fastest-growing importer in Asia, with a CAGR of +20.8% from 2007-2018. Sri Lanka experienced a relatively flat trend pattern. By contrast, Thailand (-1.4%), South Korea (-2.2%), Turkey (-3.9%), Japan (-4.2%), China (-8.9%) and China, Hong Kong SAR (-12.4%) illustrated a downward trend over the same period. Bangladesh (+33 p.p.), Viet Nam (+9.3 p.p.), Cambodia (+4.4 p.p.) and Indonesia (+3.2 p.p.) significantly strengthened its position in terms of the total imports, while Turkey, China and China, Hong Kong SAR saw its share reduced by -2.5%, -8% and -16.8% from 2007 to 2018, respectively. The shares of the other countries remained relatively stable throughout the analyzed period.

In value terms, the largest cotton fabric importing markets in Asia were Bangladesh ($3.4B), Viet Nam ($2B) and Indonesia ($855M), with a combined 54% share of total imports. China, China, Hong Kong SAR, Sri Lanka, Turkey, Cambodia, Thailand, Japan, South Korea and the United Arab Emirates lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 35%.

Cambodia experienced the highest growth rate of imports, in terms of the main importing countries over the last eleven-year period, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Import Prices by Country

In 2018, the cotton fabric import price in Asia amounted to $5,633 per thousand square meters, reducing by -3.6% against the previous year. Over the period under review, the cotton fabric import price continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2011 when the import price increased by 23% y-o-y. The level of import price peaked at $9,532 per thousand square meters in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, import prices stood at a somewhat lower figure.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of destination; the country with the highest price was China ($8,692 per thousand square meters), while the United Arab Emirates ($3,143 per thousand square meters) was amongst the lowest.

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

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

Global Coconut Market 2019 – Thailand’s Imports Continue to Grow Robustly, While Domestic Production Declines

Consumption By Country

Production 2007-2018

Production By Country

Harvested Area 2007-2018

Yield 2007-2018

Exports 2007-2018

Exports by Country

Export Prices by Country

Imports 2007-2018

Imports by Country

Import Prices by Country

Consumption By Country

Market Forecast 2019-2025

Production 2007-2018

Production By Country

Exports 2007-2018

Exports by Country

Export Prices by Country

Imports 2007-2018

Imports by Country

Import Prices by Country

Consumption By Country

Market Forecast 2019-2025

Production 2007-2018

Production By Country

Producing Animals 2007-2018

Yield 2007-2018

Exports 2007-2018

Exports by Country

Export Prices by Country

Imports 2007-2018

Imports by Country

Import Prices by Country

Not just sand castles

The many uses of sand

As cities grow, so does demand for sand

Sand mafias are stealing entire beaches

Likes grains in an hourglass

Small and mighty

Strength in numbers

China’s growing chip army

Enlisting the big guns

Secret Weapons

On the front lines

Consumption By Country

Production 2007-2018

Production By Country

Exports 2007-2018

Exports by Country

Export Prices by Country

Imports 2007-2018

Imports by Country

Import Prices by Country

Consumption By Country in Asia

Production in Asia

Production By Country in Asia

Exports in Asia

Exports by Country

Export Prices by Country

Imports in Asia

Imports by Country

Import Prices by Country

most viewed today