Surveillance of agricultural price and trade policies : a handbook for Argentina

WORLD BANK TECHNICAL PAPER NUMBER 294 Surveillance of Agricultural Price and Trade Policies A Handbook for Argentina Alberto Valdes and Barry Schaeffer in collaboration with Adolfo Sturzenegger and Ricardo Bebczuk VNI KNOX& RECENT WORLD BANK TECHNICAL PAPERS No. 216 Carr, Improving Cash Crops in Africa: Factors Influencing the Productivity of Cotton, Coffee, and Tea Grown by Smallholders No. 217 Antholt, Getting Ready for the Twenty-First Century: Technical Change and Institutional Modernization in Agriculture No. 218 Mohan, editor, Bibliography of Publications: Technical Department, Africa Region, July 1987 to December 1992 No. 219 Cercone, Alcohol-Related Problems as an Obstacle to the Development of Human Capital: Issues and Policy Options No. 220 Kingsley, Ferguson, Bower, and Dice, Managing Urban Environmental Quality in Asia No. 221 Srivastava, Tamboli, English, Lal, and Stewart, Conserving Soil Moisture and Fertility in the Warm Seasonally Dry Tropics No. 222 Selvaratnam, Innovations in Higher Education: Singapore at the Competitive Edge No. 223 Piotrow, Treiman, Rimon, Yun, and Lozare, Strategies for Family Planning Promotion No. 224 Midgley, Urban Transport in Asia: An Operational Agenda for the 1990s No. 225 Dia, A Governance Approach to Civil Service Reform in Sub-Saharan Africa No. 226 Bindlish, Evenson, and Gbetibouo, Evaluation of T&V-Based Extension in Burkina Faso No. 227 Cook, editor, Involuntary Resettlement in Africa: Selected Papers from a Conference on Environment and Settlement Issues in Africa No. 228 Webster and Charap, The Emergence of Private Sector Manufacturing in St. Petersburg: A Survey of Firms No. 229 Webster, The Emergence of Private Sector Manufacturing in Hungary: A Survey of Firms No. 230 Webster and Swanson, The Emergence of Private Sector Manufacturing in the Former Czech and Slovak Federal Republic: A Survey of Firms No. 231 Eisa, Barghouti, Gillham, and Al-Saffy, Cotton Production Prospects for the Decade to 2005: A Global Overview No. 232 Creightney, Transport and Economic Performance: A Survey of Developing Countries No. 233 Frederiksen, Berkoff, and Barber, Principles and Practices for Dealing with Water Resources Issues No. 234 Archondo-Callao and Faiz, Estimating Vehicle Operating Costs No. 235 Claessens, Risk Management in Developing Countries No. 236 Bennett and Goldberg, Providing Enterprise Development and Financial Services to Women: A Decade of Bank Experience in Asia No. 237 Webster, The Emergence of Private Sector Manufacturing in Poland: A Survey of Firms No. 238 Heath, Land Rights in C6te d'Ivoire: Survey and Prospects for Project Intervention No. 239 Kirmani and Rangeley, International Inland Waters: Concepts for a More Active World Bank Role No. 240 Ahmed, Renewable Energy Technologies: A Review of the Status and Costs of Selected Technologies No. 241 Webster, Newly Privatized Russian Enterprises No. 242 Barnes, Openshaw, Smith, and van der Plas, What Makes People Cook with Improved Biomass Stoves? A Comparative International Review of Stove Programs No. 243 Menke and Fazzari, Improving Electric Power Utility Efficiency: Issues and Recommendations No. 244 Liebenthal, Mathur, and Wade, Solar Energy: Lessons from the Pacific Island Experience No. 245 Klein, External Debt Management: An Introduction No. 246 Plusquellec, Burt, and Wolter, Modern Water Control in Irrigation: Concepts, Issues, and Applications No. 247 Ameur, Agricultural Extension: A Step beyond the Next Step No. 248 Malhotra, Koenig, and Sinsukprasert, A Survey of Asia's Energy Prices No. 249 Le Moigne, Easter, Ochs, and Giltner, Water Policy and Water Markets: Selected Papers and Proceedings from the World Bank's Annual Irrigation and Drainage Seminar, Annapolis, Maryland, December 8-10, 1992 No. 250 Rangeley, Thiam, Andersen, and Lyle, International River Basin Organizations in Sub-Saharan Africa No. 251 Sharma, Rietbergen, Heimo, and Patel, A Strategy for the Forest Sector in Sub-Saharan Africa No. 252 The World Bank/FAO/UNIDO/Industry Fertilizer Working Group, World and Regional Supply and Demand Balances for Nitrogen, Phosphate, and Potash, 1992/93-1998/99 No. 253 Jensen and Malter, Protected Agriculture: A Global Review (List continues on the inside back cover) WORLD BANK TECHNICAL PAPER NUMBER 294 Surveillance of Agricultural Price and Trade Policies A Handbook for Argentina Alberto Valdes and Barry Schaeffer in collaboration with Adolfo Sturzenegger and Ricardo Bebczuk The World Bank Washington, D.C. Copyright © 1995 The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/THE WORLD BANK 1818 H Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20433, U.S.A. All rights reserved Manufactured in the United States of America First printing October 1995 Technical Papers are published to communicate the results of the Bank's work to the development com- munity with the least possible delay. The typescript of this paper therefore has not been prepared in accor- dance with the procedures appropriate to formal printed texts, and the World Bank accepts no responsibili- ty for errors. Some sources cited in this paper may be informal documents that are not readily available. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the author(s) and should not be attributed in any manner to the World Bank, to its affiliated organizations, or to members of its Board of Executive Directors or the countries they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this publication and accepts no responsibility whatso- ever for any consequence of their use. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this volume do not imply on the part of the World Bank Group any judgment on the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. The material in this publication is copyrighted. Requests for permission to reproduce portions of it should be sent to the Office of the Publisher at the address shown in the copyright notice above. The World Bank encourages dissemination of its work and will normally give permission promptly and, when the reproduction is for noncommercial purposes, without asking a fee. Permission to copy por- tions for classroom use is granted through the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., Suite 910, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, Massachusetts 01923, U.S.A. The complete backlist of publications from the World Bank is shown in the annual Index of Publications, which contains an alphabetical title list (with full ordering information) and indexes of sub- jects, authors, and countries and regions. The latest edition is available free of charge from the Distribution Unit, Office of the Publisher, The World Bank, 1818 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20433, U.S.A., or from Publications, The World Bank, 66, avenue d'Ina, 75116 Paris, France. ISSN: 0253-7494 Both authors work in the Latin America Technical Department of the World Bank. Alberto Vald6s is an agricultural adviser; Barry Schaeffer is an agricultural economist. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Vald6s, Alberto. Surveillance of agricultural price and trade policies: a handbook for Argentina / Alberto Vald6s, Barry Schaeffer. p. cm. - (World Bank technical paper; no. 294) ISBN 0-8213-3333-X 1. Agricultural prices-Government policy-Argentina-Statistics. 2. Farm produce-Argentina-Statistics. 3. Produce trade- Argentina-Statistics. I. Schaeffer, Barry, 1957- . II. Title. III. Series. HD1862.75.V35 1995 338.1'882-dc2O 95-32649 CIP Contents FO R E W O R D ...................................................................................................................................v A BS T R A C .................................................................................................................................. vii P R E F A C E ...................................................................................................................................... ix ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................. xi IN TR O D U C T IO N ...........................................................................................................................1 CHAPTER 1: PROTECTION INDICATORS DEFINED ..........................................................3 D efinition of Indicators................................................................................. 3 D ata A ssem bly ........................................................................................... 3 Nominal Rate of Protection (NPR) ................................................................... 5 Effective Protection Rate (EPR) ...................................................................... 8 Producer Subsidy Equivalent (PSE) ................................................................ 12 Effective Rate of Assistance (ERA) ................................................................ 15 CHAPTER 2: PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS.................................... O verview ................................................................................................ 18 NPRs and Import Tariffs ............................................................................. 19 Who Received the Hidden Income Transfer?..................................................... 19 Individual Commodities .............................................................................. 27 APPENDIX: COMMODITY CHARTS AND PROTECTION INDICATOR CALCULATION TABLES...........................................................................................................39 iii FOREWORD Latin America and Caribbean countries are at different stages of a policy reform process involving their overall economies and their agriculture sector. Agricultural trade and price policy reform are emerging as particularly complex and controversial topics. The Surveillance project, for which this Handbook was prepared, was undertaken by the Advisory Group of the Technical Department in the Latin America and Caribbean Region to offer a framework for the analysis and monitoring of agricultural price and trade policy reforms. Each Handbook presents a quantitative analysis of the structure of incentives for agricultural activities and measures income transfers as a result of government policies for the country concerned. Quantification, and the resulting transparency, can be an effective deterrent against discriminatory treatment regarding agricultural pricing and trade. Sri-ram Aiyer Director Technical Department Latin America and the Caribbean Region v ABSTRACT This is one of a series of handbooks which have arisen from a Surveillance project to evaluate agricultural price and trade interventions in eight Latin American countries for seven commodities for the period 1984 to 1994. The countries included in this Surveillance project are Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Paraguay and Uruguay. The aim of the project is to make transparent the effects of agricultural trade and price policies on agricultural incentives. The level and extent of protection and export taxation is often largely unknown, due to policy instruments and administrative measures that are difficult to quantify. To achieve this goal of transparency and comparability across products and countries, a common methodology was applied to each country to calculate four policy indicators: Nominal Protection Rate (NPR), Effective Protection Rate (EPR), Effective Rate of Assistance (ERA), and Producer Subsidy Equivalent (PSE). This Handbook presents and discusses the results and methodology for Argentina on beef, cotton, maize, sorghum, soybeans, sunflower, and wheat for 1985-1993. vii PREFACE How level is the playing field for agriculture after the initiation of trade and price reforms? Agricultural price interventions in Latin America were predominantly implemented using restrictions such as discretionary import and export licenses, direct price regulations, burdensome customs clearance procedures, and fixed and variable tariffs. The level and extent of protection and export taxation -- the hidden income transfers -- was largely unknown, due to the use of complex policy instruments. With the maze of overlapping effects it was virtually impossible to ascertain the effect of these impacts across subsectors. An outgrowth of this lack of transparency within the framework of price incentives is insufficient political pressure to attain a fair playing field within the agricultural market. Like most countries in Latin America, Argentina does not have a 'transparency institution' providing greater public awareness of the way in which activities in agriculture and other sectors can sometimes receive preferential treatment. Most countries in Latin America are beginning to embark on a unilateral process of tariffication with bound tariffs, eliminating quota restrictions and also removing export taxes. Argentina preceded most other countries in the region by implementing a bold trade reform program during the second half of the 1970s, which experienced a setback in the 1980s. Beginning with the 1990s, a new, more deep-seated trade reform program was implemented. These new reforms include the removal of export taxes on the trade of agricultural products. The Surveillance project addresses a major gap in the analysis of trade and price policy for agriculture. To provide transparency, countries require a mechanism which enables vigorous screening and monitoring of price interventions. Once reforms are undertaken what indicators can be used to analyze surveillance of price interventions? For this report a quantitative assessment of trade and price policy interventions has been carried out involving seven commodities for eight Latin American and Caribbean countries during 1984-1994. These countries are Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Paraguay and Uruguay. Four policy indicators, Nominal and Effective Rates of Protection (NPR and EPR), Producer Subsidy Equivalent (PSE) and the Effective Rate of Assistance (ERA) were used. To achieve comparability across products and countries, a common methodology and formatting of the data was applied to calculate the four policy indicators. Gauged annually, these indicators expose subsidies and taxes in specific commodity markets. It is proposed that such surveillance be institutionalized and undertaken periodically as a monitoring mechanism to assess agricultural trade and price reform. The main results for Argentina are discussed in Chapter 2. Alberto Valdds Agricultural Adviser Latin America and the Caribbean Region ix ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We would like to thank our collaborators Adolfo Sturzenegger and Ricardo Bebczuk for their substantial contribution to this document. Adolfo Sturzenegger and Ricardo Bebczuk were responsible for assembling the raw data series used in this document; for providing a number of background computations; for supplying us with information on the market structure of each of the agricultural commodities covered in the study; and, for commenting on our interpretation of the results derived from the study. The authors are particularly grateful to Melanie Meyer for her excellent assistance in the various revisions of this report. Alberto VaId6s and Barry Schaeffer xi INTRODUCTION The Surveillance Study seeks to provide a consistent framework and yardstick with which to measure the progress of price and trade reforms. As a part of that study, this Handbook has the following goals: * to explain each quantitative tool used to assess trade and price policy with respect to a commodity (Chapter 1); and * to present the results along with supporting documentation for the calculation of protection indicators (Chapter 2 and the Appendix). Beginning in 1985 and continuing through 1993, this project's goal is to assess historical agricultural price policy (i.e., prior to reforms), and current agricultural price policy. Four policy indicator measures of assessment have been applied to several major importable and exportable agricultural commodities; they are: Nominal Protection Rate (NPR); Effective Protection Rate (EPR); Producer Subsidy Equivalent (PSE), and Effective Rate ofAssistance (ERA). Chapter I explains these policy indicators. Each is subject to limitations and is an approximation. Using the four indicators together means that the NPRs and EPRs are complementary to the PSEs and ERAs. The first two are effective in measuring the structure of incentives as affected by price interventions. The latter two are effective in quantifying the combined effect of price and non-price policies on income transfers between producers and the rest of the economy. Combined, the four provide insight into a sector's aims and incentives. A tariff-equivalent approach based on direct border/domestic price comparison was used to estimate the market price support component to these indicators. While we expect that trade and price policy intervention explain most of the observed price wedge, one cannot rule out that domestic market structure in the particular activity will also influence the results. Thus, not all of the price wedge observed is policy induced. The four indicators help readers to see the results in terms of a broad picture. However, depending on how the question is posed, different analysts can arrive at very different numbers (for the same product in a given year). Thus, it is necessary to provide detailed information concerning the background computations. The analysis of these indicators allows policymakers to examine various policy issues. For example, which activities help or hinder agricultural price and trade policy? Are transfers price-based, or do they exist as direct income transfers? Are reforms already in place that reduce the level of protection? How much and how accurately do 1 the quantitative indicators reflect exogenous shocks, such as changes in border prices? How uniform is the structure of incentives across various activities? Does the trade regime result in significant anti-export bias? Below are examples, discussions and results directly related to Argentina. For the interested reader, a summary of the protection indicators appears in Tables 5 and 6 (at the end of Chapter 2). The main results are shown on pages 17 and 18, figures Ia and lb, and tables 5, 6 and 8. Figures la and lb illustrate income transfers. Taking both la and lb together, a sharp decline in the level of taxation since 1990 can be seen. Moreover, in 1993, some producers received positive transfers. 2 CHAPTER 1 PROTECTION INDICATORS DEFINED Definition of Indicators In order to measure periodically the structure of incentives for various agricultural activities, and to produce a consistent, quantitative assessment of income transfers between agriculture and the rest of the economy, indicators must be comparable over time, across commodities, and across countries. Further, they must be easy to measure and understand, and must accurately reflect the incentive structure of the underlying policy instrument(s). Data Assembly The first step is to examine and understand the data used to calculate the indicators. A review of the characteristics of the indicators follows a discussion of the process by which the data were assembled. The Surveillance Project's analysis begins with a broad overview of a given commodity's marketing chain in the country concerned, followed by information gathering. Is a commodity exportable or importable? How many steps exist in the chain? Is any significant processing required? A typical chain involves transport to processor - processing - transport to the wholesaler - wholesaler's activity - transport to port facility - lading and shipment. Once the marketing chain has been delineated, each step of the chain can be analyzed with cost and price estimates. The NPR, EPR, PSE and ERA all involve comparison of a domestic price with its border equivalent. This is true for both inputs and outputs. The next logical step in the surveillance process is to focus on pricing instruments using the marketing chain derived above as a sequential series of "price points." Relevant domestic prices of both outputs and inputs need to be obtained before assembling the database to calculate protection rates. It is also necessary, in the case of inputs, to acquire the technological coefficients of converting input into output. Domestic prices should ideally be acquired at the farm level. In reality, however, most prices are based on those at the central market, warehouse or auction (outputs) or at retail (inputs). This information can be obtained from farm budget data. Direct payments through subsidies, and such costs as taxes and payments to marketing boards should be accounted for at the farm level in addition to those prices paid and received directly. After delivery of the commodity to the central market, transportation and marketing costs are an important consideration as are any necessary processing costs. Internal transport and related costs can be substantial, and provide for a 'natural' rate of protection to producers of importables 3 and an implicit tax to the producers of exportables. Physical transformation of the raw product, i.e., wheat ground into flour, soybeans crushed into oil and meal, and cotton ginned into seed and fiber, should also be taken into account. Thus, conversion factors must take into consideration such processes. Moreover, price subsidies and taxes may exist in addition to the direct costs. Transportation should also be considered a major cost unless the processing center/central market is close to the port of entry/exit. At the port of entry/exit in the marketing chain all tariffs, taxes, subsidies, port charges and other costs associated with either the importation or exportation of a commodity must be accounted for. This stage in the marketing chain is the most difficult to examine because it is here that the government (or other interested party) is most likely to intervene. Additionally, border prices of the commodity and its inputs are identified at this stage. For example, the government may charge large user fees that are implicit tariffs if state trading is a factor. Border prices, when converted to domestic currency from world prices, reflect the opportunity cost to the economy of producing the commodity. This focus on the use of opportunity cost as a benchmark against which trade and price policy is assessed is the essence of the economic approach used in this study. Many problems exist in selecting the world price benchmark. If grade and quality differences exist between the internationally traded product and the local commodity, problems arise because one could be comparing dissimilar products. Thus, the estimate of protection may be measuring differences in the two products and not protection. An example would be white vs. paddy rice. Moreover, the world price itself can be misleading if the markets are thinly traded (for example, white maize). At this stage in the marketing chain a proper exchange rate should be identified. The criterion for selection in the Surveillance report was the exchange rate farmers/processors/exporters receive for their product. In most cases it was the official exchange rate. However, existence of multiple exchange rates or some other form of indirect taxation using the exchange rate complicates the task of defining a valid rate. The Surveillance Project did not include an adjustment for indirect effects of economywide policies in the real exchange rate . Thus, all calculations of the four indicators, NPRs, PSEs, ERAs, and EPRs, are at the relevant nominal exchange rate. A critical step before the calculation of the indicators is price adjustment. In determining the adjustments three decisive factors are taken into consideration. The first is whether the commodity is an exportable or importable. The second is the place or point of competition between the domestically produced commodity and its overseas counterpart. The third is the point in the marketing chain at which the two prices are to be compared. See Maurice Schiff and Alberto Vald6s, "The Political Economy of Agricultural Pricing," Economics in Developing Countries, vol. 4 (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992). 4 For the exportable, the point of competition is normally the port. Using the central farm marketing point as the place of comparison, the costs of the marketing chain must be subtracted from the f.o.b. border price to obtain the farm-level price. The net result is a border equivalent price that can be meaningfully compared to the domestic price. For an importable, the point of competition is frequently the processor. Again using the central farm marketing point as the place of comparison, the marketing chain cost must be added to the c.i.f. border price until the point of competition is reached. The costs are then subtracted from the central farm marketing point. These adjustments provide an accurate comparison between the domestic price and its efficiency benchmark. Below, an example of the calculation together with actual illustrations of these adjustments is given along with discussions of each indicator. Nominal Rate of Protection (NPR) In this study the Nominal Protection Rate is defined as the ratio of the prevailing domestic price relative to the appropriate adjusted border price in the absence of intervention. Thus, our NPR is an 'equivalent tariff' measure and does not necessarily coincide with the explicit tariff for the commodity in question. The formula for the NPR for commodity i is the following: Pk-PTE0 NPR =PrE0 where Pd is the domestic price, P" is the world price of commodity i, and Eo is the exchange rate. While this calculation is relatively simple, it is very important to select accurate prices for the ratios, and it is essential to have a thorough understanding of the domestic markets where the 2 prices are formed. Once the NPR is calculated, the results can be interpreted. Values can range from positive to negative and each has its own meaning regarding policy. A positive NPR means the producer is receiving a higher price for the commodity than he would without intervention, and the consumer is paying more for the product. Positive protection is frequently associated with importables. A negative NPR signals that the producer is being discriminated against relative to the prevailing border prices. 2 See chapters 2, 3 and 4 in Isabelle Tsakok, Agricultural Price Policy, (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1990) for a useful reference on the NPR, EPR and PSE. 5 A zero NPR suggests that the structure of protection is neutral, i.e., producers face domestic prices comparable to border prices. The following NPR calculation will help illustrate the above (see Table 1). The commodity depicted is the exportable wheat. Table 1 is of standardized format designed to approximate the marketing chain of a commodity. Section 1 in the table determines the correct exchange rate and border price. Using 1993 as an example, the appropriate border price is US$121 per ton FOB. This represents the cost of I ton of wheat purchased at the port in Argentina. Since this study does not adjust for a possible exchange rate misalignment, the official exchange rate is used.3 For 1993, the exchange rate is 1.00 Argentinean pesos (Arg) per U.S. dollar. The costs associated with exporting the commodity are then examined. These costs are reported in section 2. In the example, three port costs are accounted for in this section. The first is the export tax (or subsidy), the second is storage/handling/loss, and the third is port charges. Argentina had a general export tax that has ranged from 1.5% (1988-89) to 25.3% (1990). In 1993, however, the NPR calculation shows an export subsidy of 2.5%. Using 1993 as an illustration, the export subsidy is Arg$3.0, the estimate for storage/handling/loss Arg$5.6 (non-intervention only) and the port charges are Arg$5.0. In addition, to account for the differences existing between the storage/handling/loss for intervention and non-intervention cost estimates, a fourth line is included (2a). The estimated difference between the two cost estimates for 1993 is Arg$. 1. The next step is to examine costs associated with the marketing chain. Sections 3, 4 and 5 of table I account for these costs. Four costs are reported for Argentina wheat: transportation costs from the port to the processing center, processing costs, commissions and taxes. For 1993, transportation costs are Arg$4.8, processing costs are Arg$12.8, and commissions and taxes total Arg$6.0 and Arg$2.3, respectively. Finally, commissions and taxes each have two estimates -- intervention and non-intervention. The estimated difference is accounted for under adjustments in section 4 (2b). The total for 1993 is Arg$.2. Finally, in many cases after accounting for all the costs, a difference still exists between the border equivalent and the domestic price. Market structure is the main cause of the difference between the two prices. Therefore, to account for these differences, adjustments can be made in each section. It is important to note that with these adjustments the border equivalent price with intervention (section 5) will equal the domestic price reported in section 6. For Argentina, no adjustments were necessary. In section 6 appropriate domestic prices are selected. In 1993, the domestic price was Arg$86.5. The NPR estimates appear in section 7. To calculate the NPR for 1993, the difference between the domestic and border equivalent price without intervention (Arg$86.5 - Arg$83.8 = Arg$2.7) is divided by the border equivalent price. The estimate for 1993 is 3.2%. Chapter 2 discusses the results. For a comparison of the NPRs with and without the exchange rate misalignment correction for eighteen developing countries, see Schiff and Vald6s, "The Political Economy of Agricultural Pricing." 6 . � TABLE 1 Standardized Format •Nominal Rate of Protection Соип[гу: Агрмгiпа Туре: ЕкрогимМ СоттодпУ: YNaat Рып7 о1 Сотрви7iоп: Вогды 13DII ].9@4 19fli 19ВН 1993 19$S1 198-L 1Н93 1На,1 1. UNADlU6TFD BOПDER РПК:F Е=а,вп9. вви 1с1 о.32 о.в1 1лв в.72 п.12 з.7ьз о7 в.79е 25 7.оо 1.оо Вогеы Rюв 1U9 FOB Тм 111.Б 103.в ВВ.О 101 3 169.3 1в7.В 702.9 115.4 121 0 BordrPnглinLOCSICurrencY з5.2 в3е иб.7 +7z7 4,з7в.7 555,99э.2 9о5,1ы.о 7ив 12о.а 2. eDRDFR ADJUSTMENTS � TыillsRubalдas/Atlluaunмta " 1в1 16.91 113.81 16.21 17.21 1951.71 1740.666.31 И0.732.в1 11.71 30 12а1 5югреПWМ9п9Аогк 0.3 0.7 О.в 0.3 {6.2 6,825.9 1.976.9 0.7 (О 71 Рог7 Смвгрвв 11.91 1в.81 1в.61 (2В.31 1162.71 122.57В.в1 152.7в9.51 15.01 15 01 6tыpвMrWenpM1OSS ноп-игм,мгюп ому n.a 13 в1 15.д 121.е1 па1.е1 12ь.вев.п 1а1,зв7.7а 15.э1 1ь в1 выди Ргкв Epuhalмt 1w1tП htыvм7bnl 2ь.2 в2 о 7а.ь ио.7 Э,ае.х а73,вю.з n2,25zo 7о2.9 112.7 eordr Fiu E<,ulvвNnt 1wi[hou7 ncыvмtbnl 31.7 75.1 112.3 в27.В 3,9Б3.8 607.630 В В71,012.В 10в 5 109.в 7. СО9Тб FПОМ B011DER 70 PROCESSWG 1W710LE6ALF MARKET) . Tыif1 s/SиЬкiд�вЧАдlиsОгюпtв 7rмaporn[an 13.61- '19.21 nosl 1зв.э1 13а9.л 1вв.е9гв1 n5s.soe.п и в1 и w Огпи � ewdr h'w EqurvaW7 вИы hовив'rq 1wM lntwи7ionl 21.6 62.7 93.7 3в2.6 2,В99.1 326.992.в 61В,750.7 9в.0 107.в Bwдr Rkв ЕWЧа4п7 e11r honвairq lwfunul ю7ыrи7юпl 28.2 65 9 101.6 ЗВ9.3 3.60{ 6 в80,В3J.0 В55,506.б 99.7 705.0 в. PROCE661NG СОSТ 1WYqlFSALE АЧRКЕТI TrЛ1s/5иbiдюв/Ад7иsbпвпи 1Б1 Срм�явюм 6 iаив О.Б 1.0 0.5 0.5 63.4 10.880 5 Э,170.8 0.1 10 21 РгосвяsМр Совгк 10.в1 12.01 13.01 113д1 1в7.61 110.231.41 11В.ВЗ7.81 113.71 112 в1 Мыkвtвр Мвгуиs огмы wn-мг..вп7юпсоп.пгвкюпк n д 1+л1 ю.21 12а.51 12ns1 127,97в.21 1вв.бо5.д 1s.71 1во1 Иоп-игы�мгюп Тв.о ю.в1 n.ы n.7a ю.в1 159.31 и2,ьев.еl 12в.оа1.о1 12 в1 12 31 сыюыкюп 7.о 1о 1о 7.о 7о 1.о 7.о 7.о 1о Badr Ргkв ЕрвvМм7 М1огв RонккУр 1ыМ n7ыvмгюпl 19.0 вб.1 ВЭ.в 339.В 2,39В.2 2вв.940 7 528.716.7 76.1 Вб.S вогды Ргiсв EpuvaMn7 овlоо Pгornarq 1wi11юw игыvмтпl 25.о 5в.3 9о.7 це.о зд+0.з в7о,7оо.е ььs,аь0 п.в е3 е 6. СО9Т9 FПОМ СОиЕС7К1м POW7 1FARM1 ТО PROCE6fiON , Tvi11al6uEaWas/Адlикипми Тгsпвра7аlюп Othы вогды Pr1n EraurvaMn7 а7 CoEвctbn ГоИ7 lwith иtwм7юпl 19.0 аб.1 83.а 339.В 2,39В.2 2вв,9в0.7 52в.718.7 76.1 Ве 5 вогды Ргтв Елимаlмг вг Со9.пюп Роиг lwnhouг ииrvигюпl 25.о Бе 3 9о.7 Эвв.о 3аво.3 в 1о,1ао е 5ба.ои.о n.6 ез.е 9. ооиЕ9т� РикЕ вогды ил,ою.в1. 19.о вьл е3.в 339.6 z39e.2 2вб.9во.7 ь2в,77в.7 7в.1 ees Со9впюп РоЬUFыт1 79.о ав.7 е3.в ээ9.б 2,39в.2 2вв,9во.7 Б2е,77е 7 7в 1 еа.ь 7. NPR Badr �20.6% �17.6% -70% �7.в% -22.9% -26.в% -в.В% -1.6% 2.б% wмоиваи 2+.2% -2о.9х -в.ох �1.вх 26.ох -зо.ох ь.зх 1.9х З.:х соивс7юп гомг 1Рыгп1 а АпгнW гапllк ые as 7oeows: 1985-19.5%. 19Вб-76.5%, 7967�6.5%, 79вб-1.5%, 19в9л.5%, 199U2Б.3х, 1997-в.5% апд 1992-1.5х. 1993 мая м варагг suoady о1 2.5х � в. Ths Ую rpiesмts а conec[ion го 7М п7вгvмгiоп ргlсв 1о всоw7 1ог дЛlвгисп И cost slruclwв а1 inurvm7an апд non-n7srvмnon Drresa. СегЧи coab, i в. slоса9ы7ипдlтрМSя впд commiaswm впа шц w еаlсиюиа ov aPWriю в roмunt Dысвпгарв w Doch гМ iпгыvвтiоп мд non-И7ervмtbn Pnces. 7Na мгмодоb9У rieWв cwo coan. As а resul[. ад'lикгпюпи аге Dmsen[eд И[hesa Имк 7о аСС01Л11ы Nв дг11lгвП4в в1 Ив 1Чо СОЧ вк(Тв7iоПк. � с. From 19в5-1991, Уи о11юю1 сиггвпсу wo гМ ашЧвИ. Е1lвсwв 1/1/92, i[ ыав гМ Рвю ы9мtвю. Source: Suivei/lепсе Рго%ect, LATAD, 1995 Effective Protection Rate (EPR) In most cases, trade policy extends beyond output prices and into the input markets. The Effective Protection Rate (EPR) indicator accounts for these additional interventions. The EPR measures how trade barriers on a product and its tradable inputs jointly affect value-added in a particular activity. This indicator has the advantage of examining the resource allocation effect of a tariff structure. Previous work has shown that the same tariff (or NPR) can imply different Effective Rates of Protection, depending on the level of taxation on the imported inputs and on their importance in the production process. By including inputs, the EPR becomes a more encompassing instrument and, at the same time, more difficult to calculate. Inputs are often sub ect to both tariffs and quantitative restrictions. Product quality and defining an appropriate border price for a direct price comparison can be a problem. This study considers the principal purchased inputs including fertilizers, chemicals, seed, and the cost of operating farm machinery and equipment (tractors, combines, milking equipment, plows and fael consumption). Calculation of the EPR is very similar to that of the NPR. Instead of being a ratio of the output prices, as is the NPR, the EPR is a ratio of the value-added at domestic prices (intervention) to value-added at world prices (without intervention). Value-added is defined as the value of output less input costs. The formula for the EPR for commodity i is the following: EPRi =.U -VAI!v& VA!'E, where VA d and VAw are value-added at domestic and world prices, and EO is the appropriate exchange rate. Interpretation of the EPR is similar to the NPR. For positive EPRs, the returns earned through the activity with intervention are greater than those earned without intervention. For negative EPRs, the reverse is true. Finally, for EPRs equal to zero, the protection factor is neutral and the returns are the same. Since EPRs are, in fact, NPRs which have been extended to include inputs, similar behavior between the two indicators is expected under certain conditions. For example, if the inputs are a small proportion of the value of output, calculating the EPR is of little value. Although the EPR provides more information, it also contains biases because of input substitution possibilities. In practice, however, these biases tend to be ignored because elasticities of substitution are virtually impossible to obtain. 8 TABLE 2 Standardized Format Effective Rate of Protection Country: Argentina Type: Exportable Commodity: Wheat Level: Farm 15 iufl 19az 1988 1M 1K 1921 199 1. 1. OUTPUT Domestic Price (a) 19.0 46.1 83.4 339.6 2,398.3 286,940.7 528,757.3 76.1 86.5 Quantity 1 Ton 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Value at Domestic Prices 19.0 46.1 83.4 339.6 2,398.3 286,940.7 528,757.3 76.1 86.5 Border Price Equivalent (a) 25.0 58.3 90.7 346.0 3,240.3 410,100.6 564,042.0 77.6 83.8 Quantity 1 Ton 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Value at Border Price Equivalent 25.0 58.3 90.7 346.0 3,240.3 410,100.6 564,042.0 77.6 83.8 2. TRADABLE DIRECT INPUTS Seeds Quantity KG Per MT of Output 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 Domestic Price $Arg Per KG 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.7 6.8 468.3 1,434.0 0.2 0.2 Domestic Cost 1.5 3.8 6.8 29.9 283.0 19,512.0 59,749.6 9.4 10.1 Border Price Eq. Price $Arg Per KG 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.7 9.2 669.3 1,529.7 0.2 0.2 Border Price Eq. Cost 2.0 4.8 7.3 30.4 382.4 27,886.8 63,736.7 9.5 9.8 Insecticide Quantity LT Per MT of Output 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 Domestic Price $Arg Per Lt 2.5 5.9 9.3 34.7 277.2 19,488.0 92,051.7 11.5 15.1 Domestic Cost 1.0 2.4 3.9 14.5 115.5 8,120.0 38,354.9 4.8 6.3 Border Price Eq. Price $Arg Per Lt 2.5 5.9 8.5 31.6 241.1 17,716.3 92,051.7 10.6 12.9 Border Price Eq. Cost 1.0 2.4 3.5 13.1 100.5 7,381.8 38,354.9 4.4 5.4 Herbicide Quantity LT Per MT of Output 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 Domestic Price $Arg Per Lt 1.9 4.8 8.7 33.2 289.3 18,253.2 95,620.5 13.6 13.7 Domestic Cost 0.9 2.2 4.0 15.2 132.6 8,366.1 43,826.1 6.2 6.3 Border Price Eq. Price $Arg Per Lt 1.9 4.8 7.9 30.2 219.2 15,211.0 86,144.6 11.7 11.7 Border Price Eq. Cost 0.9 2.2 3.6 13.8 100.5 6,971.7 39,482.9 5.4 5.4 Total Direct Inputs (Domestic Prices) 3.4 8.4 14.6 59.6 531.1 35,998.0 141,930.5 20.3 22.7 Total Direct Inputs (Border Price) 3.9 9.4 14.5 57.4 583.3 42,240.4 141,574.5 19.3 20.5 a. From 1985-1991, the official currency was the australe. Effective 1/1/92, it was the peso argentino. The prices in local currency reported here reflect the differences in exchange rate. Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 TABLE 2 (cont) Standardized Format Effective Rate of Protection Country: Argentina Type: Exportable Commodity: Wheat Level: Farm 1H5 191i 1987 198B 1989 1990 inai 1992 i9m 3. TRADABLE INDIRECT INPUTS Machinery Quantity Hours Per MT of Output 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 Domestic Price $Arg Per Hour 1.1 2.1 4.3 17.3 132.1 17,411.9 44,921.2 5.1 3.9 Domestic Cost 3.6 6.6 13.3 54.0 412.8 54,412.2 140,378.8 16.0 12.1 Border Price Eq. Price $Arg Per Hour 0.8 1.5 2.9 11.3 94.4 14,041.8 36,820.7 4.6 3.9 Border Price Eq. Cost 2.6 4.8 9.0 35.3 294.9 43,880.8 115,064.6 14.3 12.1 Fuel & Oil Quantity LT Per MT of Output 21.60 21.60 21.60 21.60 21.60 21.60 21.60 21.60 21.60 Domestic Price $Arg Per Lt 0.1 0.2 0.5 2.0 12.8 2,025.8 3,499.1 0.3 0.2 Domestic Cost 2.9 5.4 10.8 43.6 275.4 43,757.7 75,581.6 7.5 5.4 Border Price Eq. Price $Arg Per Lt 0.1 0.2 0.4 2.0 12.8 1,841.7 3,499.1 0.3 0.2 Border Price Eq. Cost 2.4 4.4 8.3 43.6 275.4 39,779.8 75,581.6 7.1 5.4 Total Indirect Inputs JDomestic Prices) 6.4 12.0 24.1 97.6 688.2 98,169.9 215,960.4 23.5 17.4 Total Indirect Inputs (Border Price) 5.0 9.2 17.2 78.9 570.3 83,660.5 190,646.2 21.4 17.4 4. VALUE ADDED Direct Inputs Only At Domestic Prices 15.6 37.7 68.7 280.1 1,867.2 250,942.7 386,826.8 55.8 63.8 At International Prices 21.1 48.8 76.2 288.5 2,657.1 367,860.3 422,467.4 58.3 63.3 Direct & Indirect Inputs At Domestic Prices 9.1 25.7 44.7 182.5 1,179.0 152,772.8 170,866.4 32.3 46.3 At International Prices 16.2 39.6 58.9 209.7 2,086.8 284,199.7 231,821.3 36.9 45.8 5. EPR -43.5% -35.1% -24.2% -13.0% -43.5% -46.2% -26.3% -12.5% 1.1% Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 Again, an actual EPR calculation illustrates the above (see Table 2). The commodity depicted is again the exportable wheat. Section 1 contains both the domestic and border equivalent price of I ton of wheat. The domestic price for 1993 is Arg$86.5 and the border equivalent price is Arg$83.8. It is important to note how these two prices are derived. Referring back to table 1, the two prices can be found in section 5. Their ratio minus 1 is the NPR. In effect, the concept of EPR starts where that of the NPR ends (the relationship between the domestic and border output price) and expands the NPR concept to include tradable input prices (both domestic and border). The example incorporates three tradable direct inputs into the calculation (see section 2 of the table). The direct tradable inputs used are seeds, herbicides and insecticides. The domestic and border prices are shown along with a technical coefficient for each input. The technical coefficient is the amount of input needed to produce I unit of output. For wheat the unit is 1 ton. Using 1993 as an illustration, it required 41.67 kgs of seed, .42 Its of insecticide, and .46 Its of herbicide to produce I ton of wheat. Each of these inputs is valued at both its domestic cost (Arg$.2 per kg for seed) and border cost (Arg$.2 per kg for seed). The sum of the direct tradable inputs valued per ton at their domestic price is Arg$22.7 and at the border price is Arg$20.5. In section 3, the tradable indirect inputs take into account the cost of machinery, equipment, fuel, and oil. Section 3 follows the same format as section 2. Combined, sections 2 and 3 will add up to the cost of the inputs in producing 1 ton of wheat. Using the year 1993 as an example, it required 3.13 hrs of machinery use and 21.6 Its of fuel and oil to produce I ton of wheat. Each of these inputs was valued at both its domestic cost (Arg$3.9 per hour for machinery) and border cost (Arg$3.9 per hour for machinery). In both the domestic and border equivalent cases, the sum of the indirect tradable inputs is Arg$17.4. Section 4 tabulates value-added at both domestic and border equivalent prices. Value- added at domestic prices is the domestic price of output per ton less the sum of the three directly tradable and two indirectly tradable inputs valued at their domestic price. Value-added at border equivalent prices is the border equivalent price of the output (determined from NPR calculations) less the sum of the same inputs valued at border equivalent prices. For 1993, the value of 1 ton of wheat at domestic prices is Arg$86.5 and Arg$83.8 at border equivalent prices. The sum of the costs (tradable direct and indirect) valued at domestic prices is Arg$40.1 (Arg$22.7 + Arg$17.4). The same cost valued at border prices is Arg$37.9 (Arg$20.5 + Arg$17.4). Therefore, value-added at domestic prices is Arg$46.3, and at border prices is Arg$45.8. Section 5 shows the calculations for the EPR. For 1993, the EPR is the difference between value-added at domestic and border prices (Arg$46.3 - Arg$45.8 = Arg$.5), divided by value-added at border prices. The EPR resulting from this calculation is 1.1%. Chapter 2 discusses the results. 11 Producer Subsidy Equivalent (PSE) Governments intervene in a variety of ways in an attempt to assist agricultural producers. Although price interventions represent an important form of assistance, non-price measures could be important as well. The PSE can be defined as compensation to farmers for the loss of income resulting from the removal of domestic agricultural policy measures at a given level of production. Specifically, it is the sum of net output market support, input subsidies, marketing/transport/storage subsidies, deficiency payments, and non-price transfers (research, extension, irrigation) Expressed as a sum, the PSE is an absolute aggregate monetary figure and can be calculated both for individual commodities or as an overall sector PSE. However, to make the PSE comparable across commodities and countries, the aggregate PSE should be expressed as a ratio. The PSE is then a ratio of policy transfers compared to the total value of domestic production (valued at domestic prices). The formula for the PSE for commodity i is as follows: ((P4 - P7E) Q) + -Pw E.) TC Q,) + DP + NPT; PSE, N Pf Q where Pd and PW are the domestic and world price of commodity i, pd and p' are the domestic and world prices of inputj for commodity i, TC is the technical coefficient of inputj for commodity i, Q is the total production of commodity i, DP and NPT are the deficiency payments and non-price transfers payable to producers of commodity i, and Eo is the exchange rate. In addition to price interventions, this instrument can capture a variety of non-border types of assistance to producers. Non-border transfers cover a range of expenditures, from agricultural research and extension, public investment in irrigation, and credit subsidies, to broader benefits like tax concessions. The PSE herein covers only those public expenditures allocated to the specific commodities being analyzed.5 As a measure of iso-income rather than a unit subsidy at a given level of output, the PSE is a lump-sum budgetary substitute for both price transfers (as measured by EPR) and non-price transfers. The net income of farmers from transfers through the output and input market remains unchanged. It is important to note that this definition differs from other estimates because non-price transfers have not been included in the denominator. Our decision not to include non-price transfers is based on our opinion that farm income, as perceived by the agriculture sector and many government census departments, does not include government expenditure on research and extension, and irrigation. 4 For a more detailed explanation of the PSE, see GATT, "Quantitative Measurement of Support: The PSE", Technical Paper 87-1315 (Geneva, Switzerland: GAIT), September 8, 1987. s The coverage of the non-price transfers can differ amongst various studies. For a discussion on this see Tim Josling and Stefan Tangerman, "Measuring Levels of Protection in Agriculture: A Survey of Approaches and Results" in Agriculture and Governments in an Interdependent World: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference of Agricultural Economists edited by A. Maunders and A. Vald6s (Brookfield, VT: Gower Publishing Co, 1990). 12 Interpretation of the PSE is similar to the other indicators. A positive PSE reflects that the producer is receiving positive income transfers. A negative PSE means the producer is being 13 TABLE 3 STANDARIZED FORMAT PRODUCER SUBSIpY EQUIVALENT Country: Argentina Type: Exportable Commodity: Wheat Level: Farm 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Market Value of Output Output (Thousands of Tons) 13,600 8,700 9,000 9,500 9,000 10,000 11,039 9,715 9,685 Price Per Ton (a) 25 58 91 346 3,240 410,101 564,043 77 86 Total Market Value of Output (Millions) 340 505 819 3,287 29,160 4,101,010 6,226,471 745 836 Assistance (Millions) Market Price Support (82) (106) (66) (60) (7,578) (1,231,600) (389,514) (15) 26 Marketing Board 8 12 34 183 3,371 53,605 116,280 0 0 Input Policies 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Credit Assistance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Research & Extension 3 5 14 70 1,756 43,095 102,578 19 22 Total Assistance (71) (88) (17) 192 (2,451) (1,134,900) (170,656) 4 48 Producer Subsidy Equivalent -20.9% -17.5% -2.1% 5.8% -8.4% -27.7% -2.7% 0.6% 5.7% a. From 1985-1991, prices expressed in australes per MT. After 1991, in pesos argentina per MT. b. PSE estimates do not include expenditures of the Ministry of Agriculture. Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 taxed. Zero PSE implies a neutral policy. Unfortunately, the PSE reflects the costs of providing assistance (non-price interventions), and not the actual benefits received by farmers. Thus, the PSE will be inflated by the difference between cost of the program and actual benefit received by producers (the difference being the costs of administration), and the amount of inflation is determined by the government's efficiency in providing the benefits to the producers. Table 3 illustrates a calculation of the PSE for Argentinean wheat. It has two parts. The top section displays a calculation of the total market value at domestic prices. The lower section, Assistance, lists the cost per year of the various government transfers. For wheat, this includes market support (tax); the Marketing Board (until 1991), and research and extension. The results are located at the bottom of the table. For a numerical example, refer to the year 1993. Production of wheat was 9,685,000 MTs and the domestic price was Arg$86.4 per ton. Thus, the total market value of wheat in 1993 was Arg$836 million. Transfers included market price support of Arg$26 million, and research and extension on wheat of Arg$22 million. The total of all the transfers divided by the total market value (at domestic prices) of wheat yields a PSE of 5.7%. Effective Rate of Assistance (ERA) The Effective Rate of Assistance (ERA) is conceptually close to the PSE and the EPR. It is similar to the PSE in that it attempts to capture non-price as well as price assistance, but is dissimilar in that the ERA measures effects on value-added. The ERA is the difference in domestic and internationally aggregate value-added prices added to transfers from marketing, transport and storage subsidies, deficiency payments, and non-price transfers (research, extension, irrigation) relative to aggregate international value-added prices. The ERA can be defined as the percentage change in returns per unit of output to an activity's value-adding factors due to the entire assistance structure;6 ((VAY-VATEa)Q;)+DPi+NPT ERA1-V,O VA I E,o Q, where VAd and VA' are value-added per unit of output for commodity i at domestic and world prices, Q is the total production of commodity i, DP and NPT are the deficiency payments and non- price transfers payable to producers of commodity i, and Eo is the exchange rate. The ERA represents the broadest indicator of protection used in the study. This means, however, that the data required for calculations are difficult to obtain and manipulate. Interpretation of the ERA is much the same as the other indicators of protection. A positive ERA indicates government intervention in favor of the producer. A negative ERA indicates that the producer is being penalized. A zero ERA implies that government interventions have little effect in either direction. For a reference on the origin and concept of the ERA, see GATT, "Effective Rate of Assistance and Related Methods," Technical Bulletin UR-89-0392 (Geneva, Switzerland: GATT), November 20, 1989. 15 Table 4 uses the exportable wheat as an example. Section 1 estimates output assistance. Total assistance for the ERA is measured using a monetary absolute. In this case, total output is multiplied by the domestic price giving the total revenue with all intervention taken into account. Total output is multiplied by the border price equivalent giving the total revenue without taking any intervention into account. Using the year 1993 as an example, total output is 9.7 million tons while the domestic and border equivalent prices are Arg$86.5 and Arg$83.8, respectively. In section 2, input assistance is estimated using the same methodology as output assistance. Cultivated area or output is multiplied by the appropriate technical coefficient, and this figure is then multiplied by the domestic price and the international price of the input to obtain an estimate of total output cost. In the case of Argentina, five inputs were used in the calculation: seeds, insecticides, herbicides, fuel and oil, and the tradable component of machinery. Ten estimates of total individual input cost were calculated; five at domestic prices and five at border equivalent prices (see the input seed during 1993). Presented in the first line of this section is the technical coefficient of 41.67 kg of seeds needed to produce 1 ton of wheat. The second line represents the total amount of seeds needed to produce 9.7 million tons of wheat (technical coefficient multiplied by the annual production for 1993). Thus, the total amount of seeds used in 1993 was 402.7 million tons. The total value of seeds at domestic and border prices is then calculated. The domestic price per ton is Arg$.24 and the border price per ton is Arg$.24. Multiplying these prices per ton by the amount of seed used, gives the total value of seeds valued at the domestic price (Arg$97,662 million) and at the border price (Arg$94,673 million). Each of the above steps is carried out for all five of the inputs. Section 3 illustrates non-price assistance. Data for this frequently comes from government budget data and are aggregate totals allocated to a specific commodity. As a result, many absolutes are used. An example of this is Argentina where one program representing transfers to producers existed. The transfer is for research and extension, and in 1993, Arg$22,177 million was transferred. The composite value-added calculation at both domestic and border equivalent price is shown in Section 4. In 1993, aggregate value-added at domestic prices was Arg$469,226.7 million and at border prices was Arg$442,616.6 million. Section 5 shows the calculated ERA. In the above example, dividing Arg$469,226.7 million by Arg$442,616.6 million and subtracting I yields an ERA for wheat of 6.0% in 1993. 16 ТаЫе 4 Standardized Format Effective Rate of Assistance -�� Coмlry: Arqentfna 7ура: ЕарогlвЫв Comrnadity Wheвt lsval: Fвгт . ].3@5 1355 ].9�Z ].9ЕН ].9Н@ ].9;lS! ].@9.1 ].(!31 L49� 1. PR1CE RELATED OUTPIlГ А9515ТАИСЕ TotN Ovlput 000 Топв 13,600 8,700 9,000 9,500 9.000 10.000 11,0Э9 9,715 9.666 DопивNс Ргкв (а1 19 48 Вз Э40 2,Э98 288.841 628,7Ь7 77 80 теы ои[риг vdu• ы Daмetic Pricы 2se,1-2e 4о1дм 7ьо,420' з,22е,4вs 21,Бе+,вв0 2,ае9лОв,sоо Ь.аз6,9ы ,724 744,ев5 езв,719 1п[вгпвlfопМ Rlcв 1а1 25 68 91 748 Э,240 410.101 584,012 78 В4 ToWOutputValuвatlntвmationalPricв з4о,Э42 5о7,и4 а1в,015 з.zев.бsе 29,1ез,п4 4,101,оое,4ве ва2е.469л65 7Ь9д2в во9,171 2. РРоСЕ REUTED 1NPUT А5515ТАИСЕ 759.628 В09.171 7otNOutvut ОООТмв 1Э.800 В.700 9.000 9,500 9,000 10,000 11,0Э9 9,715 9.666 Saeds lnput'! Usa Per KG Par М7 о1 Output 41.7 41.7 41.7 41,7 41,7 41.7 41.7 41.7 41.7 lпри[к'в Tota1 Uве 586.667 382,500 375,000 Э95,в33 375.000 416,667 159,958 404,792 402.708 Dомва[iе Price 000 fArq Рег KG 0.04 0.09 0.16 0.72 8.79 469.29 1433 99 0.2з 0 24 lпри['в Тоса1 Vaiw @ Domeatic Ricы 20.650 Э2,902 60,784 28Э,931 2,547.016 195,119,бв9 В59,57Ь.545 91,621 97,662 lntametioпsl Price 000 lАг9 Рн KG O.OS 0.11 0.18 0.7з 9.18 669.2В 1529.68 0.2Э 0.24 lnput'в Tota1 Vа1ив @ lnternational Ргiсвв 27.227 41.588 В8,097 289.229 Э,441,248 278,в8в,441 703,689.920 9Э,422 94,873 1пвк1'icide lnput'в Use Рвг �Т Раг МТ о1 Dutpul 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 lnputi s То[а1 Uвв 5,687 3,825 3,750 3,958 Э.750 4,187 4,600 4,04в 4,027 ротев[к Prica 1Агр Per LT 2 6 9 Э5 277 19.488 92,052 12 15 lnwt'+ТоиlValw@ОотавгкPricee 1з,95о х1.з00 з5,оо7 1з7,зв4 1,Оз9,6еЬ e1.199.s2e 42з,з99,244 4в,7Ь7 6o.eso lntarмtional Prica SArq Per lT 2 8 8 32 241 17,718 92,052 11 13 lпри['s 7ota1 Va1w @ lпtегпабопаl Ргkев 13,950 21,ю0 з1,825 124,894 904,067 73.818,117 423,Э99,24в 4з.297 51,787 НегWгiде lпри['s Use Per LT Pv М7 о1 Output 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 ` 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.5 1"а lnpub'в 7о[е1 Use 6.233 3,988 4,125 4,354 4,125 4,58з 5,060 в,15Э 4,4ю � ()eмatic Ргiсв lАгр Рег L7 2 5 9 ЭЭ 289 18.26Э 95,620 14 11 lпри['в То[а1 Va1w @ Domesric Pricsв 11,912 19,271 Э5,905 114,615 1,193,з65 Вз,660,5Э2 483.795,900 60,793 В0,850 lпtвгпадопеl Рпсе lАгр Раг LT 2 Б 8 ю 219 16.211 вв,115 12 12 lnput's Tou1 Va1ua @ lnterмtianal Prkea 11,912 19,271 32,811 131,468 901,057 В9,717,110 4J6.862.163 52,407 51.787 МасАiпиу lnput'в Шв Рег оив Рег МТ of Output 3.1 3.1 Э.1 3.1 3.1 7.1 Э.1 Э.1 3.1 ири[в•вто[иw. • 42,5оо п,1ее 28,12ь 29,еее 2e.12s э1,250 Э4,497 з0,зЬ9 ю,2оз DопввНс Prica fArq Рм Нои 1.11 2.11 4.26 17.28 1Э2.10 17И 1.в9 44921 21 5.16 Э.ВЬ lприtЪ То[а1 Va1ua @ Oomotic Ргiсы 48.376 57,ЭВ8 t19,56J 612,921 з,715,Эв1 541,121,541 1,549.611,2Э2 156,524 116.521 lnternational Prics tAry Рвr Ноиг 0.82 1.5Э 2.87 11.29 94 Эб 14011.В5 38в20.66 4.60 7.86 1nWYe То[е1 Va1ue @ lnternational R1cee 35.055, 41,БВ6 В0,788 ЭЗБ,243 2,853,843 в38.807,694 1.270.197.731 139.76Э 116,521 Fue1 Ь ОА lпри's Usв Раг LT Рег М7 of Ои[Wt 2L6 21.6 21.6 21.6 21.8 21.6 21.6 21.8 21.6 lnputs's 7ota1 Usв 29Э,780 1в7.920 194,400 205,200 194,400 218,000 238,442 209,844 20В.764 Оотеа4с Prke lArq Раг LT 0.13 0.26 0.60 2.02 12.75 2025.82 3499.15 0.Э5 O.IS lnput'в Tote1 �а1ив @ Doпюstic Prkea з9.122 16,6]7 97,277 414,123 2.478,865 437,577,392 834,Э45.568 7З,370 51,7в7 1п1егм1iомl Price fMq Рег LT 0.11 0.21 0.38 2 02 12.76 1841.66 3499.15 О.ЭЗ O.I5 lприrв Tots1 Vв1,и @ мtегмгьопsl Рг�ев 32,зэз эе.ь4з 74,2Ь7 л4,123 2,+7в,ебь э97,797,ы 9 вз4.з4s,Ьве ь9,еn 51,787 3. NON-PR1CE AS516TANCE pirкl Рвутвпtв ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Сгвд'п SиЬвМюв 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 О Твг Егsтрlbпв 0 0 0 О 0 0 0 0 0 вавввпh 8 Епмвiм 2.908 5,282 11,324 69.854 1,756,798 43,094,6Э4 102.577.9&1 18.874 22,177 OtMr MarkeNngBoard 8.251 12.147 3l.243 1В2,570 Э,Э71,389 63.606.21Э 11В.279,89В 0 0 0 0 0 0 4. VALUE AOOED Anietвd VNw Аддвд 10опюsдс Ргiсыl 1зь.2п.9 241,175.0 вsолЬо.е 1,9еь,еза.9 1Ь,7з7,7вз.9 1,в2+,идее4.7 z,105,Ob2,117.7 Эзв.894 в +ее.228.7 lMвssistвdVвlивАдддllmrмtbnвlРгkввl 219.е81.2 зв4,еЬZе ью,409.9 1.991,7зе.е 18,7е1,аь.7 2,е41,997,49ь.1 2,БЬ9,ол,е4о.2 зво,nЬ.9 442.ь,е.е Ь. Ем -зе.5х -ю.1х -1ь.1х л.Эх ле.2х -4z.ex -17.7х -7.2х е.ох а. From 198Ь-1981, tlи oMCW еигмеу wu tM wвпвМ. ЕИкМв 1nI92, ft wu [М рвю вгрвп[Мю. ТМ ргlсвв 1п bcal сиггмеУ гороnвд Мго гввк[ ди ддд(вгвпсав in втсМпqв гвtв. � Source: Surveil/апсе Project, LATAO, 1995 CHAPTER2 PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS Overview A summary of the protection indicators for Argentina is shown in Tables 5 and 6. For a more detailed account of the calculations for the NPR, EPR and PSE, see the standardized worksheets in the Appendix. Table 5 presents a composite weighted annual average of the four protection indicators. Since all the commodities reported were exportables, the composite also represents the export sector. The weights are the total revenue of the commodity (valued at domestic prices) relative to the aggregate value of all commodities included in this study. The general trend is a decline in taxation since 1990, and in 1993. some commodities received subsidies. This trend is evident for all the protection indicators. It is important to observe that the export tax is almost identical to the I NPR, This suLyaests that other factors. such as market structure, do not create a wedge bety een domestic and border price. Table 6 shows the protection estimates by commodity. In the last three years NPRs have ranged from a high of 4.5% (see sorghum in 1993) to a low of -13.3% (see sunflowers in 1991). The NPRs have followed a pattern characteristic of exportables. However, the last three years have seen a marked decline from relatively large negative protection (49% or lower) to a level very close to zero (or positive). Closer examination of the NPRs revealed that both the trend and overall magnitude is directly related to the export tax present in each year. In general, inputs can influence the production indicators (EPR, PSE and ERA) in two ways: first, the input market can be characterized by higher domestic prices relative to the border price. The difference between the two prices is an import tariff on inputs. Second, the relative share of tradable inputs in total cost also affects the input market. Table I of the Appendix illustrates this relationship by commodity. For example, both soybeans and wheat have the highest cost shares at 48% while cotton has the lowest at 24%. In addition, examination of table 6 shows that the EPRs are typically lower than the NPRs. This reflects both the import tariff present on imported inputs and the significant cost share attached to most products. Transfers on exportables (as reflected by the PSE) have generally been negative due to export taxes. On average, the PSE is slightly above the NPR estimate and the EPR estimate is slightly lower than the ERA estimate. Combined, these two comparisons show the presence and magnitude of non-price transfers. The two sources for the non-price transfers are the marketing board (until 199 1), and research and extension. 18 NPRs and Import Tariffs Table 7 compares the NPR and export taxes for 1992 and 1993. Overall, this comparison shows that they are very similar. The NPR for beef in 1993, for example, was 3.5%. A small amount of protection exists. During the same year, the beef sector received a subsidy of 3.5% for FOB price. Thus, the NPR and export tax agree. Who Received the Hidden Income Transfer? The question remains as to which agricultural commodities benefited from the trade regime in place during the time period of the study? Previous measures on the EPR and PSE reported the transfer per unit of output. Here we show both the absolute monetary value of the transfer for each commodity and the transfer per unit (see table below). Figures la, lb and table 8 show the total transfers for all commodities. Both graphs point to a general decline in export taxes since 1990, and a small subsidy in 1993. Table 8 shows the actual amount of the transfer by program and commodity. Examination of figures Ia and lb, and table 8 reveals that soybean and beef producers have paid a proportionally larger share of the taxation compared to the other products. For example, in 1990 (the peak year for total transfers within the study), soybean and beef producers had negative transfers of US$575.4 and US$530.7, respectively. These two sub-sectors made 62% of the total transfers that year. By 1993, however, transfers declined as soybean producer's negative transfers totaled US$20 million (see table 8). Beef producers received a positive transfer of US$180.6. Sorghum and cotton producers have generally had lower levels of transfers during the period studied. Table 8 also examines the specific programs through which the transfers occurred. Until 1992, the majority of the transfer came from taxation within the pricing mechanism of each commodity. During its highest year, 1990, over US$1.9 billion was transferred from producers to the rest of the economy from the seven commodities studied. This figure has decreased rapidly since then, and in 1993, a subsidy of US$252 million was paid. Other transfers included a marketing board transfer, (until 1991) and research and extension. Until recently (1992), the majority of the transfers were represented by market price intervention. However, since market price intervention has declined in impact in recent years, research and extension has had a proportionally greater impact. Various monetary per MT measures by commodity are presented in the table on the following page. The first line shows the domestic price per MT of the commodity. These figures are included for comparative purposes. The second line is the most important. This row shows the actual transfer per MT of the commodity produced (in US dollars). When compared to the domestic price, one can see how important, in monetary terms, the transfer is to the producer. The third line shows the PSE expressed as a percentage of production valued at domestic prices. This line is included for comparative purposes. Soybeans, for example, had an average domestic price per MT of $US137.5 for 1992-1993. The transfer paid per ton of soybeans was $US4.99; in this case, a small tax is paid by the producers. Beef producers received an average price of $US782.5 19 per MT. The total transfer per ton to producers as measured by the PSE calculation was $US 19.97. Most of this was in the form of price-related transfers. See appendix tables 2c-8c for more details concerning the composition of the PSEs for all the individual commodities in their local currencies. 1992-93 Average Price and PSE Measures (Current US Dollars) Beef Cotton Maize Sorghum Soybean Sunflower Wheat Domestic $782.50 $911.50 $56.50 $38 $137.50 $127 $81.50 Price (MT) PSE Per $19.97 $12.44 $1.28 $1.41 -$4.99 -$3.72 $2.71 MT PSE (%) 2.4% 1.1% 2.2% 3.8% -3.8% -3.4% 3.2% Note: PSE (%16) are calculated from appendix tables 2c-8c, and are based on total transfers and value of production. The results cannot be duplicated using information provided in this table. 20 TABLE 5. Argentinean Weighted Average Protection Indicators 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 COMPOSITE Wt. Ave. NPR -19.5 -15.3 -10.5 -8.2 -25.0 -25.3 -7.2 -3.4 1.4 Wt. Ave. EPR -31.0 -22.5 -17.3 -16.5 -31.2 -37.0 -12.9 -8.1 -1.1 Wt. Ave. PSE -26.8 -18.6 -9.8 -7.1 -32.6 -33.5 -5.9 -1.6 3.3 Wt. Ave. ERA -29.3 -20.2 -14.2 -12.6 -29.0 -33.9 -9.8 -5.1 2.0 Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 TABLE 6. Argentina: Summary of Protection Indicators (a) -------------- ---------------- ---------------- ----------------- Exportables ----------------- ------------------- -------------------- ----------------- ---------------- 21r, lam 19 Z 18 1m 1.0 .m 1M 1993b Beef NPR -4.6 -7.5 -7.5 -6.3 -21.7 -18.7 -4.5 -1.5 3.5 ERP -4.6 -7.6 -7.5 -6.3 -21.7 -18.7 -4.5 -1.5 3.5 PSE -3.8 -7.7 -7.5 -5.7 -27.2 -21.7 -3.6 -0.1 4.9 ERA -3.9 -7.0 -6.9 -5.3 -21.3 -17.6 -3.4 -0.2 5.1 Cotton NPR -6.9 -2.8 0.0 0.0 -20.6 -19.0 -4.0 0.0 0.0 ERP -16.7 -9.5 -8.8 -8.0 -32.1 -28.1 -8.5 -2.9 -0.4 PSE -5.5 -2.5 0.8 0.2 -25.7 -23.1 -3.8 0.03 2.2 ERA -28.9 -3.5 -3.5 -1.6 -26.9 -21.4 -5.5 2.0 2.1 Maize NPR -35.0 -31.0 -23.1 -2.2 -30.3 -30.2 -6.5 -2.1 3.5 ERP -50.3 -40.6 -33.2 -9.4 -39.9 -39.5 -10.1 -6.3 2.8 PSE -52.8 -42.9 -26.3 0.6 -39.6 -39.8 -4.7 -0.6 5.0 ERA -49.2 -38.9 -29.8 -5.7 -36.7 -36.7 -7.5 -4.4 4.9 Sorghum NPR -37.4 -33.5 -25.7 -2.8 -31.0 -24.1 -8.6 -2.5 4.5 ERP -58.3 -45.5 -38.1 -13.8 -50.4 -35.9 -14.9 -7.5 5.7 PSE -58.6 -47.7 -30.0 1.0 -40.8 -28.5 -5.5 0.3 7.3 ERA -57.4 -43.4 -33.9 -8.4 -46.4 -32.6 -10.2 -3.6 9.6 Soybeans NPR -36.3 -32.6 -18.6 -17.6 -38.3 -36.1 -12.4 -8.6 -3.8 ERP -67.7 -61.5 -46.4 -38.5 -66.3 -69.8 -23.4 -21.4 -12.6 PSE -52.3 -42.5 -16.1 -17.6 -56.5 -53.0 -11.0 -6.4 -1.2 ERA -62.9 -54.9 -37.7 -33.8 -61.2 -65.7 -18.8 -16.3 -7.9 Sunflower NPR -37.3 -30.6 -19.6 -14.0 -38.6 -38.5 -13.3 -9.4 -4.3 ERP -59.4 -44.8 -33.2 -24.5 -58.0 -60.6 -23.0 -21.1 -9.0 PSE -57.2 -41.1 -18.0 -12.5 -59.3 -59.6 -12.6 -6.2 -0.6 ERA -57.4 -42.2 -25.5 -19.1 -53.4 -55.5 -18.5 -12.0 -0.9 Wheat NPR -24.2 -20.9 -8.0 -1.8 -26.0 -30.0 -6.3 -1.9 3.2 ERP -43.5 -35.1 -24.2 -13.0 -43.5 -46.2 -26.3 -12.5 1.1 PSE -27.5 -22.1 -2.3 6.0 -11.4 -39.6 -2.9 0.6 5.7 ERA -38.5 -30.1 -15.1 -0.3 -16.2 -42.8 -17.7 -7.2 6.0 a. Evaluation at the point of price determination. In most cases, unless otherwise noted, it corresponds to the processing center (mills for grain, auction center for beef etc.). b. Estimates for ERP, PSE, and ERA for 1993 are based on year end projections. Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 22 Figure Ia. Argentine Agricultural Exports. Income Transfer Due to Price and Non-Price Intervention, 1985-1993. Total Transfer US$ Millions) 200.0 - 0.0~~ - II (400.0)- N Soybeans 0 Sorghum (600.0) N Maize O Wheat (800.0) (1,000.0)- (1,200.0) 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Source: Surveillance Project, LATAD, 1995 Figure lb. Argentine Agricultural Exports. Income Transfer Due to Price and Non-Price Intervention, 1985-1993. (Total Transfer US$ Millions) 200.0 - 0.0 .23r-- (200.0)- M Cotton (400.0)C * Beef O Sunflower (600.0) - (800.0)- (1,000.0)-, 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Source: Surveillance Project, LATAD, 1995 TABLE 7. Comparison of NPRs with Tariff for Argentina. 1992 1993 Export Export NPR Tax (1) NPR Tax (1) Exportables Beef -1.5 1.5 3.5 -3.5 Cotton 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Maize -2.1 1.5 3.5 -2.5 Sorghum -2.5 1.5 4.5 -2.5 Soybeans -8.6 7.5 -3.8 3.5 Sunflower -9.4 7.5 -4.3 3.5 Wheat -1.9 1.5 3.2 -2.5 1. Negative tax is a subsidy. 25 TABLE 8. Argentina's Agricultural Income Transfers (Expressed in Current US$ Millions) Total Assistance Accross AN Commodikies (Pogram) 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Market Price Support (1.397.91 (1.132.91 1674.1) (654.51 11.902.11 (2,029.61 (529.51 (233.5 91.1 Marketing Board 81.6 57.9 83.7 111.1 167.5 55.9 55.5 0.0 0.0 Input Policies 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Credit Assistance 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Research & Extension 39.9 48.8 63.4 75.0 104.8 64.9 79.9 132.3 161.0 Total Assistance 0.290.41 (1.028.21 1527.01 (48.4) 1.829.7) (1.908.7) (394.1) (101.2) 252.1 Total Assistance Accross A# Commodts (Commodity) Wheat (224.7 (109.6 (11.81 40.7 (90.41 (301.6 (19.43 4.3 48.0 Maize (299.11 (196.63 (94.8) 3.2 (104.11 (102.2 (20.4 (3.4) 32.8 Sorghum (125.4 (52.63 (25.71 1.1 (29.7) (22.3 (4.41 0.2 7.8 Soybeans (337.4 (293.8 (139.7) (318.5) (451.2 (575.4 (156.6 (86.0) (20.01 Sunflower (217.41 (148.81 (42.4 (57.31 (198.13 (217.7) (57.13 (21.0 (2.8 Beef (89.2 (217.4 (214.7) (139.51 (604.8 (530.7 (113.5 4.7 180.6 Cotton (3.2) (9.51 2.1 1.9 (151.41 (158.9) (22.7) 0.1 5.6 Total Assistance 11.296.4) (1,028.21 (527.0) (468.4) (1,629.7) (1.908.7) (394.1 (101.21 252.1 Source: Handbook on Surveillance of Agricultural Price and Trade: Argentina, Albertao Valdes and Barry Schaeffer. Technical Department. Latin America and the Caribbean Region. The World Bank, 1995. Individual Commodities Beef Figure 2a shows that Argentina has been a consistent exporter of beef during the 1980s and 1990s. As expected for an exportable, the negative NPR across the time period studied (except 1993) demonstrates that this sector has been taxed. The results range from -21.7% (1989) to 3.5% (1993). The median value is approximately -7.0%. During the 1980s and since 1990, the NPRs have been less negative. In 1993 the NPR was positive. The main cause for the negative protection is an export tax that has varied annually from 1.5% to 21.6%. For example, referring to table 2a in the appendix, the NPR for 1993 is 3.5% and the export subsidy for the same year is 3.5%. Other years show a similar relationship. It can be concluded that the beef market does not contain significant market structure distortions that put a wedge between domestic and border prices. This is also verified by figure 2d where domestic prices during the period moved in parallel with world market prices. No tradable inputs for beef were reported. Therefore, the NPR and EPR agree throughout the period. The trend in the PSE over the last two years shows a slight subsidy received by producers, and the magnitude and direction generally agrees with the NPR. For example, the PSE in 1993 was 4.9% and the NPR was 3.5%. Before 1992 producers were moderately to heavily taxed. Figure 2b shows that income transfers (the PSEs) were negative and moderately low from 1985-1988 (averaging approximately -6.2%). However, due to a three-fold increase in the export tax in 1989, producers faced a higher tax rate and the PSE declined from -5.7% (1988) to -27.2% (1989). For the size of the monetary transfer, refer to figure 2c. In 1989, approximately US$600 million was transferred out of the beef sector. By 1993, however, US$181 million was being transferred back to the producer. Referring to table 2c in the appendix shows that most of the 1989 transfer was the result of export taxation. However, in 1993, 30% of the transfer was from research and extension. The ERA is close to the NPR, EPR and PSE. This agreement implies that no non-price transfers were reported for beef. Cotton Argentina has been both an exporter and importer of cotton (see table 3a). In some years (like 1989-91) exports are much larger than imports. In other years, 1986-1987 for example, imports are nearly equal to or greater than exports. 27 The NPR ranges from zero to -20.6% and is largely a reflection of the export tax being charged on cotton for that particular year. The EPR is slightly lower than the NPR, and reflects the tariff on imported inputs. The ERA does not agree with the EPR. This reflects the non-price transfers, which take the form of a tax exemption, for this commodity. Finally, the PSE is generally similar to the NPR and ERA. The reason for this is that the main intervention, a major negative transfer (see figure 3c), is due to government taxation of output. This tax is the annual export tax. Maize Exports (see figure 4a) averaged approximately 7 million MT early in the 1980s. However, in recent years they have decreased to approximately 4 million MT. Since 1991, the NPR has been increasing to a point were in 1993 the estimate was positive (3.5%). Before 1991, the NPR was very high (in absolute terms) and negative and generally in the range of -23% to -35% (except 1988). The level and behavior of the NPR is directly related to the export tax being charged for that given year. For example, in the year 1993 the export subsidy was 2.5% and the NPR estimate was 3.5%. Other years show a similar relationship. The EPR is lower than the NPR for most of the period. The inputs, in this case insecticides, herbicides, machinery, fuel and oil, are subject to an import tariff. The tariff ranged from 0 to 32%. Referring to figure 4c, the trend for income transfers has been decreasing intervention since the mid-1980s. The export tax accounts for most of the transfer. It has been decreasing since 1990. As a result, in recent years, the transfer through research and extension (a non-price transfer) was almost as important as the price transfers (see table 4c in the appendix). The ERA is slightly higher than the EPR. The difference between the two is a measure of the importance of non-price transfers, and in the case of maize, it is small. Two non-price transfers existed. The first was a transfer from the marketing board which was disbanded in 1991. The second is from research and extension. Sorghum The NPR, highly negative in the early years of the study, has gradually increased until 1993 when the estimate was positive 4.5%. This pattern is a reflection of the export tax rates which followed an identical pattern of an increase in 1985-1987 and in 1989, a decrease in 1988, 1991- 1992 and a subsidy in 1993. 28 The EPR is lower than the NPR for most of the period. This indicates that producers experienced additional taxation in the input market. The inputs, insecticides and herbicides, were subject to an import tariff. The tariff ranged from 0 to 32%. The PSE has followed a pattern very close to the NPR because the major component is an income transfer from the export tax. This same component accounts for most of the NPR. Finally, the ERA estimate is slightly lower in absolute value than the EPR because of a non- price transfer from research and extension. Soybeans Although the volume of raw soybean exports has decreased during the late 1980s,7 in 1990- 1991 the volume increased to its peak of 4 million MT. Soybeans have been a consistent earner of foreign exchange for Argentina. Throughout the decade exports of raw soybeans have averaged approximately 3 million MT annually. The NPR displays some volatility. For example, in 1990 the NPR was -36.1%. Three years later, in 1993, the NPR was -3.8%. Like the commodities previously discussed, the NPR mirrors the erratic changes in the export tax rate. The inputs seeds, insecticides, herbicides, machinery and fuel and oil were all subject to import tariffs during the period of the study. Seeds, in particular, were subject to a negative tariff whereas the other four inputs have positive tariffs. The positive tariffs combined with the large cost share (51.8%, see table 1 in the appendix) of the inputs causes the EPR to be considerably lower than the NPR. For example, in 1990 the NPR estimate was -36.1%. However, for the same year, the EPR estimate was -69.8%. The PSE was negative for the entire period covered and mirrored the NPR. The majority of the transfer reflected in the PSE was due to the export tax rate that is also measured by the NPR. Consequently, the pattern of change in the two indicators is highly correlated. Figure 1 a shows that soybean producers provide one of the largest transfers back to both the government and consumers. In table 6c of the appendix, the high market taxation that existed in 1990 is shown to have diminished to a point where the positive transfer from research and extension has two-thirds of the impact of taxation in the PSE calculation. Non-price transfers, reflected in the difference between the ERA and the EPR, show only a marginal impact on producers. On average, the difference between the two estimates is 5 percentage points. 7The opposite is true for soybean meal and oil. Exports for both of these processed products of raw soybeans has increased. 29 Sunflower Exports for sunflower in 1991 were slightly higher than 350,000 MT, very near the peak of 380,000 MT for the year 1985. Exports have been increasing gradually since 1986. The pattern and level of the NPR is almost identical to those of soybeans. The NPR ranges from a low of -38.6% to a high of -4.3%. The behavior of the NPR is close to that of soybeans as the two commodities' tariff rates are almost identical. The level of the NPR is a reflection of the annual export tax. The EPR is slightly lower (more negative) than the NPR. Although the tariff on imports of tradable inputs varies from year to year, the difference between the two indicators reflects the additional tax imposed on producers through the input market. The PSE is negative throughout the period of the study. The level of the indicator varies with the level of the export tax. As a result, the behavior of the transfers (and the PSE) follows that of the NPR. The difference between the ERA and the EPR is very small. Thus, non-price transfers are not a significant item. Wheat In recent years exports have leveled off at around 4.5 - 5.0 million MTs (see figure 8a). The trend of the NPR has shown increasing protection since the low of -30.0% in 1990, to a positive 3.2% in 1993. The level of the NPR is in close agreement with the export tax. For years with a high export tax (1985-86, for example), the NPR will be high in absolute value (negative). For years with a low export tax (1987-88), the NPR will be near zero. Referring to table 8a in the appendix, 1990 shows that the export tax was 25.3% and the NPR was -30%. In 1993, however, an export subsidy of 2.5% existed and the NPR for that year was 3.2%. The EPR is significantly lower than the NPR for two reasons. First, there is an import tariff on inputs. This tariff, which varies from year to year, represents an additional tax on producers. Of the five inputs included, seeds has a negative tax whereas insecticides, pesticides, machinery and fuel and oil have positive tariffs that range from 0 to 32%. Second, wheat has a high input cost share of 48% (see table I in the appendix). The income transfers mainly consist of transfers from the export tax. As a consequence, the PSE and the NPR follow a similar pattern. The one exception to this pattern was in 1989 when both the expenditures on the marketing board and research and extension were higher than both previous and subsequent years (see government in figure 8c). This deviation was due to the high support prices of the National Marketing Board. 30 Finally, the EPR and ERA estimates are slightly different, and reflect the non-price transfers from both the marketing board and research and extension (until 1991). 31 Figure 2a. Import. I Exports of Beef Figure 2b. Protecton IndIcator for Argentina Beef In Argentine 10 250000 Ifports I.-0Exports 10000 .100000- -16. |NR P 50000. 20 0I 196 1686 1987 t988 1969 1 90 191 1i92 1å93 1986 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 Sourc: FAO Trad Y#arbook, various y#ars. Source: Sureance Pro}ect, LATAD, 1993. Figure 2c. Beef Producer's Income Figure 2d. Domestic and Border Transfers In Argentina Equivalent Beef Prices In Argentina 200 600 10 7M -. r0e Support 400 .ra.g some -WGoverrn~t _ ___ ___400 ., , , , 7 9 1987 1989 1 198 1988 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 192 1993 198 1968 1990 N1: sOMe pi rasm~d e ~ p=t or r Border EILdUert Source: Suve~ane Proct, LATAD, 1993 ""kt" md~pe Z Il"--b"o"~kt."w"'wdM Saume: Survenc Pr~jct LATAD. i g= Figure 3a. Imports / Exports of Cotton Figure 3b. Protection Indicators for Argentina Cotton in Argentina 5 160000 SE 140000-0 Imports a 120000 - S100000 Exports -10 0 oo 1 NPR oe 80000- -15 a- EPR E 60oooo -20- -20 0 -30. 1986 1986 1987 1988 1989g 1990 1991 -35- . . . . . 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Source: FAO Trade Yearbook, various years. Source: Surveillance Project, LATAD, 1995. Figure 3c. Cotton Producer's Income Figure 3d. Domestic and Border Transfers in Argentina Equivalent Cotton Prices In Argentina 20 1200 201 oder Equivalent Price 0 " -- - - - - - 0- 1000 -20- -40 800 -606 600- -80- S-100 Price Support U 4 D :3 400- -120 Marketing Board 129 -140 Government 200 -160 -180 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 0 1985 1986 1987 1 88 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1986 1988 1990 1992 Note: Both prices measured at the point of competition. Border Equivalent 8 1Price is what the domestic price would be withot intervention. Source: Surveillance Project, LATAD, 1995 Source: Surveillance Project, LATAD. 1995. Figure 4a. Imports I Exports of MaIze Figure 4h, Protectin Indic.tore for Argentina Malze In ArgenUnn 10 7000000.- knports 6000000- -l0oP. Exports -4000000- CL -30, 3000000' 40 1 000000- -6 1966 1986 1967 1968 1989 1990 1991 1946 186 1967 198 1969 1990 1991 192 193 Source,: FAO Trade Yeabook, varlous yars. Source: Survelance ProJec, LATAD, 1993. Figure 4c. Maize Producer's Income Figur. 4d. Domestle and Border Transfers in Argentina Equivalent Maze Prices in Argentina 70 o - rL - 7[&p -06 e -10 -160- 200- Price suppot l1688 1*88 1987 88 1980 1980 1of1 18Q 1983 1986 1988 1990 192 t pra~ e t e pekrt p r Equ~ Source: Survelanc Pro~ect, LATAD, 1993 P~ le w= me"~ p"oa M tø WE ~m~ souroe: Piu prc LATA , -i Figure 5b. Protection Indicators for Sorghum In Argentina lo- 1o- -0- PSE [Data on Imports I Exports of Sorghum -E -20- for Argentina Not Available] -40- 40 1986 1986 1987 1988 19 1990 1991 192 193 Source: Sureance Pro}ec, LATAD, 1993. Figure 5c. Sorghum Producer's Income Figur. 5d. Domestic and Border Transfers in Argentina Equivalent Sorghum Prices in Argentina 70 -0-o -1 20 30n. i98m, '1887' '1m 1 i m 198 19 9 1987 1Se$ 1980 1980 1991 198Q 198å -10 1966 19 18 18 1'9 o9 inu0&iQpncnpMo.Bnr qMn Source: Sum~Eanc ProJect, LATAD, 1993 sc lotw*m ~~p" bow~&*'''g'" &o~e: sum..n~ sne.cA. gne Figure 6a. Importo I Exporte of Soybean Figure Gb. Pr flction Indicators for Argentina Sobeans In Argentina 4600000- 4000000 E -lo- PSE 3600000ooo °- 20- NPR 3000000- Expodts - --9 -30. 1500000--5 100000 1985 1986 1987 198 1989 1990 191 1»65 196 1967 1»8 1969 1990 191 1992 193 Source: FAO Trad Yearbook, varlous y~a Source: Survefance Proloct, LATAD, 1993. Figure Gc. Soybean Producer' Income Figure 6d. Domestic and Border Transfer8 In Argentina Equivalent Soybean Prices In Argentina _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _240- 1i 220 200 180- ."E 00 160 -000 40 -60 120 1986 1 87' 1116 1988 1 ;87 1 1966 1960 16 1m6 lomg 1966 1966 1900 19g N: OPm S madt mi p*t or n er Equil Source: Surmaffno* Pro}ect, LATAD, 1993 b w"#* HP PA uu - b m 201 o: &irv«~nc priet LATAD, 1io: Figure 7a. Imports/Exports of Sunflower Figure 71. Prat~cUon Indcators for Argentina Sunflower In Argentina 350000-1 30000m -20- 0 Expodts rit E 10000QEP 040 El >100000. ER A 1986 196 1987 1968 1989 1990 1991 -7 1985 1986 1987 1988 198 1990 1991 198 1993 Source: FAO Trade Yearbook, various Y SouC: SurV8O8nC Pro}ct, LATAD, 1993. Figure 7c. Sunflower Producer's income Figure 7. Domestic and Border Transfere In Argentina Equivalent Sunflower Price in Argentina 200 -60 180. -160 mi ·-000 1985 198 1987 1988 1ø8 180 1991 1998 19"8 198 198 1990 1999 N~e: 80MM Uma neseswd M U pat won Mfn. 8nU Eq,itM' $ouroe: SufVe~sn Pro~.ct, L.ATAD, 1 a M M m le Wmh W* M~ pMeW~on, Sourc: SunIcn~ Prjt LAT, 1a Figure Sa. Imports / Exports of Wheat Figur. Sh. Protctin Indcutors for Argentina FN Wheat In Argentina 11 10000000 NP 9000000·1MS 7000000- Eorb s 4000000- -st0 3000000- MERA 2000000- 1000000, ot 1986 1986 1987 198 1989 1990 1991 8 Ò61Q Ò710 9919 911Q 9 Source: F AO Trad Yaook VariouSyas SwUrce: Surve~~nc Proffct, LAT AD, 1993. Figure g. Wheat Producer'* Income Figur* 8d. Doesti and Border Transförs in Argentina Equivalent Wheat Pricec In Argentina 1 50120- LoJ 0 prnr"&~o 10 D0 -20 . 6 -i0 Gonin r -61966 197 18 196 1990 --- 19 9f 1å7 18 18 101991 19Q 190 196 196 1990 191 19m Noe=o pr~e no~=sue a p~ir df mqnpgn B~ne Equh~er 1 98 1 88 990 t 92 teoh awrd 8 m m -1 tw~ue source: SueTadceProc, P Lro sATAD, 1993Sore: Suveance e, LA APPENDIX COMMODITY CHARTS AND PROTECTION INDICATOR CALCULATION TABLES The Appendix presents standardized tables which provide detailed information on the calculation of each of the protection indicators for each commodity included in the study. The processed data used in the tables are based on the raw data series provided by the collaborators. Please note that the figures presented in the tables are rounded and that replicating the results using the tables may yield slightly different numbers due to such rounding. Throughout the Handbook, numbers appearing in parentheses denote negative values. 39 TABLE A-1 1991-92 AVERAGE INPUT SHARES AND COST STRUCTURE FOR ARGENTINA EXPORTABLES Conon MaIz Sorghum Soyben Sunmower What (E~. d In P ontof 04u<K Val) Sesda 10.3% 12.0% 1.8% 4.9% 2.8% 11.7% 8.7% 7.7% Inuc~ide 2.2% 5.0% 2.8% 11.7% 9.4% e0% Machinesy 13.6% 11.1% 10.6% 12.1% 13.6% 17.3% Fuel and M8 8.5% 6.0% 8.9% 6.0% 7.4% 8.0% Toi Comt 24.1% 27.0% 31.1% 51.8% 39.1% 52.0% RAu no Land Labor & Capi~i 75.9% 73.0% 8.9% 48.2% 80.9% 48.0% (Epr~dkl Nominl US. Dwr Output Prim Per Ton $340 356 338 $138 $128 312 Cost P Ton o Oupu 382 $15 312 371 349 342 RetAum to Land. Labor & Capi~i Per Ton $258 $41 326 387 379 340 Not.: Our ckIesMea'n of ot nes rigialywcntrhcted for use in iuhlng0'i. EPP.. and diiuonlyhincuales Wie bndebte component Hena.. ostoad do not ancä,de hborarlched to @i. use of achinyandquwnn 40 TABLE A-2a Standardized Format Nominal Rate of Protection Country: Argentina Type: Exportable Commodity: Beef Point of Competition Border imH 12m 1.98 19.m 1982 m220 1991 im92 12m 1. UNADJUSTED BORDER PRICE Exchange Rate (c) 0.63 0.96 2.22 9.11 477.79 5052.08 8938.75 1.00 1.00 Border Price $US FOB Ton 1111.8 1328.2 1555.3 1391.2 1461.6 1530.0 1677.0 1,974.0 1,945.0 Border Price in Local Currency 698.3 1,274.2 3,445.5 12,668.9 698,327.5 7,729,687.5 14,990,283.8 1,964.1 1,935.3 2. BORDER ADJUSTMENTS Tariffs/Subsidies/Adjustments (a) (32.0) (95.6) (258.4) (791.8) (150,722.3) (1,436,433.6) (674,562.8) (29.51 67.7 Port Charges Storage/Handling/Loss Coefficient of Transformation 0.428 0.428 0.428 0.428 0.428 0.428 0.428 0.428 0.428 Border Price Equivalent (with intervention) 285.2 504.4 1,364.1 5,083.4 234,375.0 2,693.512.7 6,127,128.6 828.0 857.3 Border Price Equivalent (without intervention) 298.9 545.3 1,474.7 5,422.3 298,884.2 3,308,306.3 6,415,841.4 840.6 828.3 3. COSTS FROM BORDER TO PROCESSING (WHOLESALE MARKET) Tariffs/Subsidies/Adjustments Transportation (1.7) (3.4) (7.1) (30.1) (1,911.2) (18,692.7) (35,755.0) (4.0) (4.0) Other Border Price Equivalent after Processing (with intervention) 283.4 501.1 1,357.0 5,053.3 232,463.8 2,674,820.0 6,091,373.6 824.1 853.3 Border Price Equivalent after Processing (without intervention) 297.1 542.0 1,467.6 5,392.2 296,973.0 3,289,613.5 6,380,086.4 836.7 824.3 4. PROCESSING COST (WHOLESALE MARKET) Tariffs/Subsidies/Adjustments (b) 0.9 2.6 7.0 21.4 4,064.1 38,732.0 18,188.9 0.8 (2.0) Processing Costs Non-Intervention Only (18.8) (34.4) (92.9) (341.6) (18,829.7) (208,423.3) (404,198.0) (53.0) (58.0) Marketing Margins Other Conversion 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Border Price Equivalent before Processing (with intervention) 265.5 469.3 1,271.1 4,733.1 217,698.2 2,505,128.7 5,705,364.5 771.9 793.3 Border Price Equivalent before Processing (without intervention) 278.3 507.6 1,374.7 5,050.6 278,143.3 3,081,190.2 5,975,888.4 783.7 766.3 5. COSTS FROM COLLECTION POINT (FARM) TO PROCESSOR Tariffs/Subsidies/Adjustments Transportation Other Border Price Equivalent at Collection Point (with intervention) 265.5 469.3 1,271.1 4,733.1 217,698.2 2,505,128.7 5,705,364.5 771.9 793.3 Border Price Equivalent at Collection Point (without intervention) 278.7 507.6 1,374.7 5,050.6 278,143.3 3,081,190.2 5,975,888.4 783.7 766.3 6. DOMESTIC PRICE Border 285.2 504.4 1,364.1 5,083.4 234,375.0 2,693,512.7 6,127,128.6 828.0 857.3 Wholesale 265.5 469.3 1,271.1 4,733.1 217,698.2 2,505,128.7 5,705,364.5 771.9 793.3 Collection Point (Farm) 7. NPR Border Wholesale -4.6% -7.5% -7.5% -6.3% -21.7% -18.7% -4.5% -1.5% 3.5% Collection Point (Farm) a. Exports tariffs for each year are: 1985-4.6%, 1986-7.5%, 1987-7.5%, 1988-6.2%, 1989-21.6%, 1990-18.6%. 1991-4.5% and 1992-1.5%. 1993 has a export subsidy of 3.5%. b. The cost of commerialization is based on a percentage of price (6.3%). Since at this stage the non-intervention and intervention prices are different, the estimate of the cost of commercialization for intervention and non-intervention will also be different. This line represents a correction to the cost of commerialization to adjust the intervention price to the level reported by the author. c. From 1985-1991, the official currency was the australe. Effective 1/1/92, it was the peso argentino. Source: SurveMence Project, LA TAD, 1995 TABLE A-2b Standardized Format Effective Rate of Protection Country: Argentina Type: Exportable Commodity: Beef Level: Farm 1. OUTPUT Domestic Price (a) 266.0 469.0 1,271.0 4,733.0 217,698.0 2,505,129.0 5,704,471.0 771.9 793.3 Quantity 1 Ton 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Value at Domestic Prices 266.0 469.0 1,271.0 4,733.0 217,698.0 2,505,129.0 5,704,471.0 771.9 793.3 Border Price Equivalent (a) 278.7 507.6 1,374.7 5,050.8 278,146.5 3,081,190.2 5,974,994.6 783.7 766.3 Quantity I Ton 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Value at Border Price Equivalent 278.7 507.6 1,374.7 5,050.8 278,146.5 3,081,190.2 5,974,994.6 783.7 766.3 2. TRADABLE DIRECT INPUTS Quantity Domestic Price Domestic Cost 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Border Price Eq. Price Border Price Eq. Cost 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Direct Inputs (Domestic Prices) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Direct Inputs (Border Price) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3. TRADABLE INDIRECT INPUTS Quantity Domestic Price Domestic Cost 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Border Price Eq. Price Border Price Eq. Cost 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Indirect Inputs (Domestic Prices) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Indirect Inputs 1Border Price) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4. VALUE ADDED Direct Inputs Only At Domestic Prices 266.0 469.0 1,271.0 4,733.0 217,698.0 2,505,129.0 5,704,471.0 771.9 793.3 At International Prices 278.7 507.6 1,374.7 5,050.8 278,146.5 3,081,190.2 5,974,994.6 783.7 766.3 Direct & Indirect Inputs At Domestic Prices 266.0 469.0 1,271.0 4,733.0 217,698.0 2,505,129.0 5,704,471.0 771.9 793.3 At International Prices 278.7 507.6 1,374.7 5,050.8 278.146.5 3,081,190.2 5,974,994.6 783.7 766.3 5. EPR -4.6% -7.6% -7.5% -6.3% -21.7% -18.7% -4.5% -1.5% 3.5% a. From 1985-1991, the official currency was the australe. Effective 1/1/92, it was the peso argentino. The prices in local currency reported here reflect the differences in exchange rate. Source: Surveillance Prect, LA TAD, 1995 TAaLE А-2о STANDARIZED FORMAT PROOUCER SUBSIDY E4UIVALENT � СоипвУ: АгУв�lnв ТУiв: ЕауогtвЬ� Cpnrвo0iry: !r1 lwM: Fвiw 1f�0 1М1 1Nt 1fq 1fЧ 1fK 1lв79 1М7 1lН9 1fp 1fl0 1М1 1!!2 1М1 Мвгkвt Vв1ив of Output Oulput 1llтввпдв о! 1wr1 5А70 5.79в 5.015 1.711 1,в81 1,910 1.В91 1.640 1.840 Пи Ри Ion111 __ 2вв 4в9 1.271 l.7зз 217.в9В 2.505.129 5.7М.171 772 793 1o�r м.Еи v.ь,. о1 u�rwr lмаакl о о а о о 1.вs7 2.nв е,з71 22.15з 1.оеэ,2э7 12.э75.о27 2д9о2.vа э,5в2 з.ее1 w..»ипо. �мiвiов.� м.ь.г rч.у s,vnar 1вы 122в1 1s221 11.5os► 12ю.21з1 и.ws.вюl 11,эзв,зssl и21 12s Ч.ь•г.w ео.л а в п ее 1.91s sвло9 вв,71о о о ! 1го,,, гд.;.. о о о о о о о о о Ged�� Авивlисо о 0 О 0 о 0 0 о о н....т а Еаи.�.п 7 1э эs 172 в.зn 1ое.lва 252.вs2 1е 5s тоиl в�..»iмов о о о о о 1sв1 12о9► 1ие► 11.vn 12аs7в1 12.ев1.11q n.оlв,ввзl s 1ео Ггодиевг SиЬвiду ЕqимИпt •з.в% -7.77� �7.5% •5.7% •27.2% �21.7% �з.б% о.7% 1.9% 1. Fоп /985• 1991, рiега гаргааsвд м waaaka рвг МТ. А1гаг 199/, м pвsos вryапtiм рвr МТ. 7. Р5Е игiпвгеа до пог includa ирнгдг'tvras оГ йв Miacry оГ Аупеиlгиге. TABLE А-3а Standardized Foпnat Nominal Rats оТ Protsction ОмввП�: 4овNУiв ТУМ: Е+9в�t�1в СимиiгУ: Глпов Го1м ef Смwмвм: lwдвг S!!S L� SY�Z SL� S!!4 ]1М Sd..L I�I SlYi 1. U1MDJUifED в011о01 /111С[ Евсlrrqвмдв Ф) 0.7 О.в I.7 7.6 х]7.х 6.14х.0 в.в1а.1 1.0 1.0 иа.гм 1т 7ю.о 1д]о.о 1.оео.о +.aso.o 1soo.o 1.аео.о ио.о вео.о 1,ио.о в.а.rм„мl.гrы�.кr 4sел 1,14е.7 1sn.s 1о.1е7.1 яьs.еоо.о е.иа.тs.е в.ио.еоо.о вss.: 1,вхх.в L вовоЕll ADJUifYFNfa 1е1 т.м.т�ыаw�.l.wм. E�enr..i.i 11ь.в1 1хs.л о.о о.о 1se.7ota n.ые.иlлl 1хи.аи.а о.о о.о vв,lп,.в� ati n4.д 1x.q 1и.я 1]оs.в1 no.e74.o1 1хw.7в:.т 1xs:.ela.q 1:ел 14х.д тв:и n.вsxl �в.о1 ь.�..�квn.оwl 1в.л n1.a1 ги.хr notp га.ssв.а 1вв.вю.q �и.хое.а и.е1 nв.д ьв>.в.4wriwA.e.. в.а.м�.еqн.wrl.ммь.....и.а 444.х 1.on.s 1.7н.е в.nя.е хех.ееьо s.еы.]в1.в a.7e1.1sao вlzо 1.ass.e вм.гаиЕаиr.иь.ммиы..�.мьм 4вя.е 1лох.7 t7ы.е в.nв.е а4l.ьев.о е.7и.]sx.e в.ав].ne.o вn.о 1.аеь.в ]. с05Т9 FAOM в011DЕ117о M10CiffMf 1MИqlFaALE АИ11кЕТ TrM1вllb+3в//1�вlпвввв т.п,nпп.ем �хе.в1 iзs.z те.а �aoza� 1я.ие.д ixoв.sas.ы 1вао.ооо.и 1ю.е1 1w.m oalr warrмEwи�.w..м.n«.ввьwlмммwмwи 4n.] 1.ых.э 1.е7ва в.вп.о v].их.] s.вы.Твs.в в.аи.lвв.о е7ел 1.]xss иа.гплЕамr.ам.nллrql.�ммим...�мл,о s]:.в ьое7s 1.в7ех в.а7х.о ]]1.ere.] eso].7sь] в.ыа.77в.о ле.в 1.]xs.• 4. мосЕвwо cosT lитасЕа.цЕ виикЕл ТвеlвllУl! WАаFвlпвмв Rаоввq Cr[в вив.W�вr.ви. х.ж 11x.2t 1xe.n us.q 1хв4та iesвs.a ins.exe.n 1х]asls.rn tx].в1 �]s.er ал. с«и.ь� х.в 1.о 1.о 1.о 1.о 1.о 1.о 1.о 1.о ы.гмЕлнr.+вевлnлтьргомnм....иа uz7 1.ои.ь 1.eso.7 в.хп.а хы.х».а s.хТв.ив.о влхь.ыа.о esxs 1.xss.e еа.а. лы Еа..r.м ывn гп��у iиамw м...мьиа 1Ч.о 1.оав ■ 1.ею.7 в.317.] ц].оов.] еахв.вю.в в.4и.хеt.о вsх.в 1.zn.e 6. Г-0вТв F1м)М COLIECTqN РОмR 1FARM1 ТО WЮСЕl8011 ТrМ1в/ W 8Уавв/bjun п+мв тг.п�.мwы 1x.n 1а.ы ю.n ыо.е1 иеа.п ио,вsв.аl 1ю.ооо.а и.д 14.п ои. инев. и.аиаа имв.ама 1ь]s1 no.q иэе.]1 1е11.]1 пв.хlе.sl 141е.вn.д аи.ооо.а 1ао.е1 1ео.а гл.г м млW..n.аеп ох1 и.е1 ро.в� п 1в.х� 1ыs.ь nssoo.o 1]eвsn.n дев.7вs.а ав.д 1и.]1 lыавг M1bв ЕWввlwа в1 евввыЬп rв+е 1wiд� lммвпеwJ 71.в ив.1 1.а]].4 7.Ио.0 х36.в1а.1 l.47х.ЧО.S е.)х1.вЧ.о 7и.х 1.114.в arar 11bв ЕоаvвlиМ w СдвеUм 7iв 1w11ваЧ MrвntleN 77.х ви.4 1.]77.4 ].ро.о хМ.цо.1 в.вtl.иl.в 7.004.4и.0 7ов.х 1.11{.в в. ооиЕтс мп ваа. - ьvиеьеi. uz7 1.ои.в 1.е]о.7 в.:п.] :ы.nz] s.vв.ив.о в.lхs.ыа.о вьх.е 1.аи.в СаввеУтГаУвlFrпl 71.в Мв.1 1.]7].4 7.ЧОА ххвА17.1 4.47х.в4о.6 в.731.вЧ.о 7и.х 1.114.в 7. М/11 вв�дr У17дв✓в -а.7% -х.471 0.0% 0.07L -1в.х% �1о.е1в -]А% О.о% О.О% сrв�,ы,гrмlг.,,,i е.вх �х.вх о.ов о.ах ао.вх 1в.ох �.о~ o.or о.ж .. Е�еп.им.ю..е1r....1иа-].хr.7иых.аs.lи7а.ох.lвиг.ох.lиаlе.вх.lмo-lв.оr.lиl-а.ов,lвпа.охмаlиа-0.оr. в. s�.в 1иы1и1. а..гмr o.�.�v .� м...еrь Ем.геw v1nx. м... е. оие .в..ыо. е. Саа ввиеавв ввУд ап 1 и1 rММв. а. wые ва� w ов ци .ан. ег �вт в4в1.а ьwnwa wьч Ч wesю ur1 nwим.lм еепь.rи.lвг�ьа тм. млт odi т нвwвl ми. сг т юв. Sourcs: Suiмi'впсе PYojвct, LATAO, J996 TABLE A-3b Standardized Format Effective Rate of Protection Country: Atgentins Type: E.Wtble Commodity: cotton Level: Farm IM im L91Z IM im IMI IM I= im 1. OUTPUT Domestic Price (a) 71.9 869.1 1,373.4 7,930.0 225,613.1 4,472,940.5 6,721,849.0 708.2 1,114.9 Ousnoty I Ton 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Value at Domestic Prices 71.9 869.1 1,373.4 7.930.0 225,613.1 4,472,840.5 6,721,848.0 708.2 1,114.9 Border Price Equivalent (a) 77 894 1,373.4 7,930.0 284,320.1 5.521,801.9 7,004,466.0 708.2 1,114.9 Quantity I Ton 1.0 1.0 1.0 - 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Value at Border Price Equivalent 77.2 894.4 1,373.4 7,930.0 284,320.1 5.521,801.9 7,GD4,466.0 708.2 1,114.9 2. TRADABLE DIRECT INPUTS Insecticide Quantity LT Per MT of Output 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.33 Domestic Price IlArg Per Lt 1.3 14.8 24.9 143.9 5,395.0 91,109,7 115.573.7 12.6 21.7 Domestic Cost 1.6 19.1 30.2 174.5 4.963.5 98,402.5 147,880.7 15.6 24.5 Border Prim Eq. Price $Arg Per Lt 1.3 14.8 22.7 130.8 4,691.3 91,109.7 115,573.7 11.7 18.4 Border Price Eq. Cost 1.7 19.7 30.2 174.5 6,255.0 121,479.6 154.098.3 15.6 24.5 Herbicide Quantity LT Per MT of Output 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.33 Domestic Price OArg Per Lt 0.9 10.7 18.1 104.7 4.503.6 79.513.9 93,299.5 9.9 IS.7 Domestic Cost 1.2 14.3 24.2 139.6 5,231.5 97,183.7 112,071.5 12.2 21.0 Border Price Eq. Prim $Arg Per Lt 0.9 10.7 16.5 95.2 3,411.8 66,261.6 84,053.6 5.5 13.4 Border Price Eq. Coat 1.2 14.3 22.0 120.9 4,549.1 as.34a.a 112,071.5 11.3 17.8 4 6 Total Direct Inputs (Domestic Prices) 2.8 33.4 54.4 314.0 10,195.0 19S,586.2 259.952.1 27.8 45.5 1-ft Total Direct inputs (Border Price) 2.9 34.0 52.2 301.3 10,804.2 209,828.5 266,169.7 26.9 42.4 3. TRADABLE INDIRECT INPUTS Msc,Nnerv Quantity Hours Per MT of Output 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 Domestic Price Mg Par Hour 2.3 22.2 36.6 266.9 7,961.0 136,940.7 205,090.8 22.2 26.8 Domestic Cost 11.7 111.1 182.9 1,334.6 39,804.8 684,703.4 1,025,453.8 111.0 133.8 Border Prim Eq. Price 4Arg Per Hour 1.7 16.1 24.7 174.5 5,686.4 110,436.0 168.107.2 19.8 26.8 Border Price Eq. Cost 8.5 80.5 123.6 872.3 28,432.0 551,180.2 $40,535.9 99.1 133.8 Fuel & Oil Quantity LT Per MT of Output- 34.57 34.57 34.57 34.57 34.57 34.57 34.57 34.57 34.57 Domestic Price OArg Per Lt 0.2 2.2 4.2 22.9 822.4 14,056.1 14,103.2 1.5 1.9 Domestic Cost 8.4 75.8 143.9 793.0 20,432.0 485,916.6 490,312.6 52.1 66.9 Border Price Eq. Price IlArg Per Lt 0.2 1.8 3.2 22.9 822.4 12,776.3 14,183.2 1 4 1.9 Border Price Eq. Cost 6.9 62.6 109.9 793.0 28,432.0 441,7".2 490,312.6 49.6 66.9 Total Indirect Inputs (Domestic Prices) 20.1 186.8 326.9 2,127.6 68,236.8 1,170,622.0 1,516,766.4 163.1 200.7 Total Indirect Inputs (Border Prim) 15.4 143.1 233.5 1,665.3 56,864.0 993,924.3 1,33o,a48.5 148.7 200.7 4. VALUE ADDED Direct Inputs Orgy At Domestic Prices 69.1 635.7 1,319.0 7,616.0 215,418.1 4,277,254.3 6,461.895.9 650.4 1,069.4 At International Prices 74.3 860.4 1,321.2 7,628.7 273,515.9 5,311,973.4 6.736,296.3 681.3 1,072.5 Direct & Indirect Inputs At Domestic Prices 49.0 $418.11 992.1 5,408.4 147,181.3 3,106,832.3 4,94111, 129.4 517.3 868.7 At International Prime 58.8 717.3 1,087.7 5,963.4 216,651.9 4,318,049.1 5,407."7.8 532.6 $71.9 5. EPM -16.7% -9.5% -8.8% -8.0% -32.1% .28.1% -a.s% -2.9% -0.4% 9. From 1OBS-1991, the official currency was the austrele. Effective 1/t/92, it was the peso argentino. The prices In local cuffeneV rePorted here feflact the ditterenow in exchange rate. Soume.- Swveawice, Project, LA Ma 1996 TABLE А-Зс STANOARIZEO FORMAT PROOUCER SUBSIDY EQUIVALENT СоипУу: llгрмм• iyp•: Европв0У СаммдмУ= Согм lиМ: F•гп 18t0 18l1 1вl2 1р! 18И 1fli 1Ч! 18t7 1!Ч 1!{8 1М0 1881 1!!2 18ff МиУ•г V•1и• of Оиtриг � Оигриг lihwимd• о1 1опЧ взв з77 эsз eso е1е 7ре е9о 217 г17 Q� Рги Pv iм 111 __ 7] 808 1 З7� 7 87(1 225 Е1� 1�М 8l1 Е 721 84В 708 1 115 тога м.ыг vr,• о1 агр�г lмвоо.l о о о о о эе эп7 нз е,7в1 1эs,7пп a.вrr,o71 s.яls.xxe 1в1 аз Авrвипсв ПMiNioral м.�.г Рг�. s�vvdr 1з► 11о1 о о 1зв.аs71 18s7.ыи 1t�е,юЧ о о м.мг.�р ао.л о о о о о о о о о ыгWг Poie+• 0 о о 0 0 о о о 0 сл.еп �••+гм�• о о о о О 0 о о о flwвM i Еигмвоп ___ 1 1 1 /5 в�1 10.828 75.777 0.05 !1 тоы м:.г.г.�. о о о о о и1 1е1 в 1s 1аs.еlы иlе,мзl 1гn.взп o.os е ггоаие.г iubrдy Eqir•1вм 5.5% -У.5% о.ех 0.2% �25.7% s9.1% �з.в% о.оэх �.sx l. fгоп ! 9дб- ! 9! !, pricвs в,рг•,sвl in wsoraNs рвг AIT. А/м !!! 1, in рваав вrовл8hв О•в 41Т. I. РSЕ.sаммм, •b пог йдидв ы/ига6n.вs д Мв г{iлisey о/Apieиry•rв. TABLE А-4а Standardized Format Nominal Rate of Protection соимгу: Агqепг�го Trpe� ЕврогlвЬk Commoдiry: Мике Point о1 СотреМ�м� Вогдеr 19.@6 ].9Hfi ].4HZ 189Н ].3fl@ 193S1 1991 >�2 ].3R2 1. ONADJUSTEO BORDEN RYCE Е,гJ,в,уедеt4 (с1 0.66 О.вб 1.ь9 zss zзz20 5141.97 951з.1з 1.оо 1.оо до,�г у„р, w5 FOB Топ п0.ь0 ев.о0 еа.оо 1оо.5о 11в.z5 11е.75 юz ее ее.зэ 9o.2s 5wder Price in loW Cuпeпry 7J.0 74.Э 174.6 75В.4 27,100.1 600,Э24.7 1.009,574.3 97.9 99.В 2. BORDER AOЛISTMFNTS ' TмteвlSubvdms/А01ив[пюпгв 1в1 119.31 118.71 122.21 111.41 16.23Э.01 1129.069.61 145.430.91 11.31 2.2 13в15taapeMeпdbnp/Loas 0.9 0.8 1.1 0.6 302.5 8.26Э.1 2,204.5 0.1 10.11 РЬп Сhвгреъ 1в.0) (5.21 110.11 145.Э1 11,R7.21 1ЭО,В51.91 158,979.В1 16.01 15.01 sго,вргМаг,у;гуА,ога ноп-lмегrмЬмОдr 1з.з1 13.41 1601 1э4.т и,24ь.т 1v,ез3.91 145,13х.71 и.01 14.п 9огдег Рге:а Ериvвlапl 1+пth iМепгепимl 47.Э 49.9 97.4 687.7 15,600.4 419,0Э2.4 B61,JJ6.5 76.7 92.9 lадег Price Ериlrвlегм (wrtlnul in[егrеп[юп1 65.7 65.7 118.5 675.5 24,lЭ0.9 541,9Э9.1 904,562.9 77.9 90.7 3. СО5Т5 FPOM 90RDFA ТО P1qCE55P1G (M/HOLESME MAR[ЕТ1 Тм11в19иЬвiдюв/Адjиппюпtг тг.пsраг.еоп 1а.Ч 19.э1 пб.а1 n2s.a> a.64s.31 192.757.s1 пы,613.q 1а.91 1ь.51 амг lопfвг Price Equirвkrп вhar Rосвввер (w�M iпlervenUмl З6.8 40.5 60.8 511.9 t 5.851.1 326.27а.9 703.723.1 71.9 77.2 9оrдег Рпса Ервrвbм вhег Rосевавр 1мИnиt eNervanlioпl 57.2 5бд 101.7 552.7 21,761.7 449.061.8 746,949 4 73.1 75.1 4. A1pCE551NG СОSТ (1N1Ю1.E5ALE MARKET) 7вгi11а16иbвЮуа/Адryаlтика 1Ы Сот�иsаюги 6 7e.es 1 5 1.2 1.5 0.6 и0.0 9,900.0 3,966.2 0.1 10.21 Roeeasin9Coпa (4.I1 f4.01 f6.31 (Бб.61 (7.340.31 1Э1.12В.71 184,542.91 111.71 112.91 Магtвlер Мвrрiпв Одкг Nonlmerrenlion Гдттnwапв 13.61 13.51 16.51 137.Э1 11.34Э 71 129,901.21 149.751.01 14-31 14.41 Nмlntarremioп Те.еа 11.31 11.31 11.91 110.21 1977.21 11Э.437.61 13Э.397.91 11 71 11.91 Сопrыаюп 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 9oNSr Rice ЕРеrеlим Ье1ае Raesslпp 1wRh mtarveMaпl 31.4 32.7 65.5 бЭ6.8 12,629.9 261,709.4 560,109.7 64.2 56.0 9огдег Price EWivakвц Ье1ого Ргосевsiпр 1wпlnut fпгвгvемiопl 46.2 47 4 85.1 446.7 19,120.5 374,718 1 599,3В7.9 55.Э 56 0 5. СО5Т5 FROM COLLECTION Р01М 1FARM1 ТО й10CES50R тыпгаrsиедака/Адrysгтепга Trartsportauon амг 9огдег Рмсе Елиvвkпt п Соllеаюп Рапг lwdh mtervemionl Э1.4 32.7 65 5 4з6.8 12.629.9 261,709.а 560.109.7 54.2 59.0 9агдег Рпсе ЕриvWм вt Cdkctaп Poin[ 1vnMout mlerrentюnl 49.2 47д 85.1 449.7 19,120.5 374.716.1 599,367.8 55.3 56.0 б. DOME5TIC PR1CE богдег Wlюbaвk 71.4 Э3.7 В5 5 439 6 12,В29.9 261,709.4 560,109 7 54.2 59.0 Сдlеспм Рапt 1Fsrm1 Э1.4 32.7 65 5 439.6 12.629.9 281,709.4 560.109.7 5в 2 58.0 z иvи 9огде. -2е.0% z4.zи п 9х t6% �24 З% za7% 4 9% л.ьх z.5% VПюlesak -Э5.0% �31.0% 23.1% -2.2% -303% �30.2% -6.5% -2.1% 3.5% Collechan Ропп 1Farm1 е. Апгивl tanlle еге as 1o11owe: 1965-26.5%. 196Б-22 5%, 1987�76.5%. 1998�1.5%. 1969 23%, 199421.5%, 1991-4.5% апд 1993-1 5% t993 мев в елроп subsdy о1 2 5%. b 7hs Iiго repmaenes а соггесnм га the imervenlion рпи [о есоипl 1« Ф1lегегкеs т спп вtгидиге af иterveMioп впд noo-mtervenhan pnces. Certeiп coets. ье. store9a/ПепдlтрПавь епд commissioпs епд [енег еге свlсиlаlед ЬУ appWm9 в canstem to lath ths тlеrvепЬоп апд погьтгегvепмоп pnces. This methotlalo9y yields twa согlг. Nowever, the tаЫе опlу hes ого Ьпе [о secount 1аг Ие cosl. As а result, atliustmeпte вге presented т these 5пеs to ессаипг 1ог ми axr•пс• п гм vп опс... с. From 1965-1991, the olficiel wrrency wвк the austrak Е11ос[rvе 111 /92, i[ was гhв рвео вгрепмго. Source: Surveil/впсе Project, LATAD, 1995 TABLE A-4b Standardized Format Effective Rate of Protection Country: Argentina Type: Exportable Commodity: Maize Level: Farm 1. OUTPUT Domestic Price (a) 31.4 32.7 65.5 438.6 12,629.9 261,709.4 560,109.7 54.2 58.0 Quantity -1 Ton 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Value at Domestic Prices 31.4 32.7 65.5 438.6 12,629.9 261,709.4 560,109.7 54.2 58.0 Border Price Equivalent al 49.2 47.4 85.1 448.7 18,120.5 374,716.1 699,367.8 55.3 56.0 Quantity I Ton 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Value at Border Price Equivalent 48.2 47.4 85.1 448.7 18,120.5 374,716.1 599,367.8 55.3 56.0 2. TRADABLE DIRECT INPUTS Insecticide Quantity LT Per MT of Output 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 Domestic Price $Arg Per Lt 0.6 0.8 1.6 12.7 208.4 7,066.1 11,987.4 4.1 3.9 Domestic Cost 0.4 0.6 1.1 8.9 745.9 4.946.3 11,391.1 2.9 2.8 Border Price Eq. Price *Arg Per Lt 0.6 0.8 1.5 11.5 181.2 6,423.7 11,987.4 3.8 3.4 Border Price Eq. Cost 0.4 0.6 1.0 8.1 126.8 4,496.6 8.391.1 2.7 2.4 Herbicide Quantity LT Per MT of Output 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 Domestic Price $Arg Per Lt 0.7 0.9 2.0 13.4 205.0 7,708.4 17,107.7 4.1 3.7 Domestic Cost 0.5 0.7 1.4 9.4 143.5 5,395.9 11,975.4 2.9 2.6 Border Price Eq. Price fArg Per Lt 0.7 0.9 1.8 12.2 155.3 6,423.7 15,412.3 3.6 3.1 Border Price Eq. Cost 0.5 0.7 1.3 8.5 108.7 4,496.6 10,788.6 2.5 2.2 00 Total Direct Inputs (Domestic Prices) 0.9 1.2 2.5 18.3 289.4 10,342.2 20,366.5 5.8 5.3 Total Direct Inputs (Border Price) 0.9 1.2 2.3 16.6 235.6 8,993.2 19,179.8 5.1 4.5 3. TRADABLE INDIRECT INPUTS Machinery Quantity Hours Per MT of Output 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 Domestic Price $Arg Per Hour 4.2 2.7 5.4 39.8 1,183.9 22,922.6 38,511.4 4.3 4.0 Domestic Cost 6.3 4.1 8.1 59.7 1,775.8 34,384.0 57,767.1 6.5 5.9 Border Price Eq. Price $Arg Per Hour 3.0 2.0 3.6 26.0 845.6 18,486.0 31,566.7 3.9 4.0 Border Price Eq. Cost 4.5 3.0 5.4 39.0 1,268.4 27,729.0 47,350.1 5.8 5.9 Fuel & Oil Quantity LT Per MT of Output 10.37 10.37 10.37 10.37 10.37 10.37 10.37 10.37 10.37 Domestic Price *Arg Per Lt 0.5 0.3 0.6 4.7 138.0 2,702.9 3,005.5 0.3 0.3 Domestic Cost 5.1 3.3 6.5 48.5 1,431.5 28,028.8 31,167.1 3.5 3.2 Border Price Eq. Price #Arg Per Lt 0.4 0.3 0.5 4.7 138.0 2,457.2 3,005.5 0.3 0.3 Border Price Eq. Cost 4.2 2.7 4.9 48.5 1,431.5 25,480.7 31,167.1 3.4 3.2 Total Indirect Inputs Momestic Prices) 11.3 7.4 14.5 108.2 3,207.3 62,412.7 88,934.2 10.0 9.1 Total Indirect Inputs (Border Price) 8.7 5.7 10.4 87.5 2,700.0 53,209.7 78,517.2 9.2 9.1 4. VALUE ADDED Direct Inputs Only At Domestic Prices 30.5 31.5 63.0 420.3 12,340.5 251,367.3 539,743.2 48.4 52.7 At International Prices 47.3 46.2 82.8 432.1 17,884.9 365,722.9 580,188.1 50.2 51.5 Direct & Indirect Inputs At Domestic Prices 19.2 24.0 48.4 312.2 9,133.2 188,954.5 450,809.0 38.4 43.5 At International Prices 38.6 40.4 72.5 344.6 15,185.0 312,513.2 501,670.9 41.0 42.3 5. EPR -50.3% -40.6% -33.2% -9.4% -39.9% -39.5% -10.1% -6.3% 2.8% a. From 1985-1991, the official currency was the australe. Effective 111/92, it was the peso argentino. The prices in local currency reported here reflectthe differences in exchange rate. Source: Surveillance P oject, LA TAD, 1995 TABLE A-4c STANDARIZED FORMAT PRODUCER SUBSIDY EaUIVALENT County: Argen.im ypØ. Exportabl Commodny: Mi L*.@#: Farm 1980 1981 1982 1993 1984 1985 1988 1987 188 199 1990 1991 1992 1993 Market Vdue of Ouput oulpus ilhoua,dø of I~one 11,900 12,100 9.250 9.200 4,900 5,044 7,865 10,394 11,30 P[ eg lon tI 31 33 66 439 12.30 281r109 s0r110 55 58 Tolla Mak.i Val,. of Ou,p,l IM,Uone 0 0 0 0 0 374 396 00 4,035 61.897 1.320.002 4.293.241 572 059 Aggistance (Møionsi Maket Prc supporl 1203) (1781 (182} (93 (20.74 1570.0051 (300.907) (12) 22 Markoing Board 1 2 7 32 006 19.789 47,104 0 0 Inpui Poåcne 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Crodi Au.tance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 R~mech & Exteneion 4 6 16 84 1.558 24.778 53,743 9 10 Totf Alsøssnc 0 0 0 0 0 (197 (1701 (1591 24 (24,510) (525,4411 <200.001 (31 33 Poducer addy Eqtåvalnt -52.6% -42.9% -20.3% 0.6% -39.0% -39.9% 4.7% -0.6% 5.0% 1. Fram 1986-1991, pri expesseda ausaesprMT. After 191, a pesosrgh'ne p.AM. 2. PSE .stymates do not mrschude expenitures of ts Minisedy of Agricente. TABLE A-5a Standardized Format Nominal Rate of Protection Country: Argentina Type: Exportable Commodity: Sorghum Point of Competition: Border 1. UNADJUSTED BORDER PRICE Exchange Rate (c) 0.66 0.86 1.68 7.55 237.20 5141.97 9813.13 1.0 1.0 Border Price SUS FOB Ton 91.8 73.5 67.8 83.8 107.8 97.3 86.1 75.7 74.5 Border Price in Local Currency 60.6 83.5 114.0 832.0 25,558.3 500,056.3 844,910.1 75.3 74.1 2. BORDER ADJUSTMENTS Taritf/Subsidies/Adjustments (a) 115.4) (13.6) (18.6) (9.5) (0.006.2) (72.508.2) (38,021.0) (1.1) 1.9 (b) StorageHandling/Loss 0.7 0.7 0.9 0.5 291.5 3,518.5 1,845.0 0.1 (0.1) Pon Charges (4.0) (5.2) (10.1) (45.3) (1.423.2) (30,851.8) (58,878.8) (5.0) (5.0) Storage/HandlinglLoss Non-Intervention On4y (2.7) (2.8) (5.0) (28.5) (1,171.2) (22,768.3) (38142.31 (3.4) (3.4) Border Price Equivalent (with intevention) 39.2 42.5 81.0 549.2 17.249.2 377.448.6 711,713.0 65.8 67.6 Border Price Equivalent (without intervention) 53.9 55.5 98.9 558.2 22,963.9 446,436.3 747,889.0 68.9 65.8 3. COSTS FROM BORDER TO PROCESSING (WHOLESALE MARKET) Tarirfs/Subsocies/Adustants Transportation (11.01 (12.3) (20.9) (178.9) (3,134.8) (121,569.01 (244.478.31 (5.4) (6.0) Odw Border Price Equivalent after Processing (with Intervention) 28.2 30.2 60.1 370.3 14,114.4 255,877.6 467,234.7 60.5 61.6 Border Price Equosalent after Processing (without intervention) 42.9 43.2 78.0 379.3 19,829.2 324,867.3 503,410.7 61.5 59.8 4. PROCESSING COST (WHOLESALE MARKET) Tariffs/Subadess/Aduntments (b) Commissions & Taxes 1.1 1.0 1.3 0.6 542.9 5,505.4 3,320.8 0.1 (0.11 Processing Costs (2.51 (3.2) (6.4) (44.9) (958.3) (26.307.9) (50,897.6) (16.5) (18.8) Marketing Margins Other Non-Intervention Commissions (3.0) (3.11 (5.4) (30.7) (1,263.0) (24,554.0) (41.133.9) (3.7) (3.6) Non-Intervention Tees (1.1) (1.1) (1.5) (8.4) (918.6) (11,071.6) (27,522.3) (1.5) (1.5) Connersion 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Border Price Equivalent before Processing (with intervention) 22.8 23.8 48.0 286.9 11,517.5 199,449.4 351,001.7 38.8 37.5 Border Price Equivalent before Processing (without ntemrvention) 36.4 35.8 64.7 295.3 16,689.4 262,933.7 383,858.9 39.8 35.8 5. COSTS FROM COLLECTION POINT (FARM) TO PROCESSOR Tariffs/Subsidies/Adjustnents Transportation Other Border Price Equivalent at Collection Point (with intervention) 22.8 23.8 48.0 286.9 11,517.5 199,449.4 351,001.7 38.8 37.5 Border Price Equivalent at Colection Point (without witernention) 36.4 35.8 64.7 295.3 16,689.4 262,933.7 383,856.9 39.8 35.8 6. DOMESTIC PRICE Border Wholesale 22.8 23.8 48.0 286.9 11,517.5 199,449.4 351,001.7 38.8 37.5 Collection Point (Faxrm) 22.8 23.8 48.0 286.9 11,517.5 199,449.4 351,001.7 38.8 37.5 7. NPR Border -27.3% -23.4% -18.1% -1.8% -24.9% -15.5% -4.8% -1.8% 2.7% Wholesale -37.4% -33.5% -25.7% -2.8% -31.0% -24.1% -8.6% -2.5% 4.5% Collection Point (Fern) e. Annual tariffs are as follows: 1985-25.5%, 1986-21.5%, 1987-16.5%, 1988-1.5%, 1989-23%, 1990-14.5%, 1991-4.5% ans 1992-1.5%. 1993 has an export subsidy of 2.5%. b. Ths lie represonts a corrton to the intnervntion pnce to scount for dterferec cost structure of intervention and n-intervenon pnces. Certain costse. i. sttoagethandlinglAs and cornmaesions and taxes are calculated by apply.n caratr to both te intervention and rte-orerntn PriCM. Ths methodology ydods two costs. However, the table only has one line to account for the cost. As a rest, adiustments are presented in these lines to account for the diff.ece in the two p-ces. c. From 1985-1991. the offcl rrency was the austrael. Effecta 1/1/92, it was the peso rgentio. Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 TABLE A-5b Standardized Format Effective Rate of Protection Country: Argentina Type: Exportable Commodity: Sorghum Level: Farm im8 i9hh 198. 1fim im 1m 1991 122 192 1. OUTPUT Domestic Price (a) 22.8 23.8 48.0 286.9 11,517.5 199,449.4 351,005.9 38.8 37.5 Quantity 1 Ton 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Value at Domestic Prices 22.8 23.8 48.0 286.9 11,517.5 199,449.4 351,005.9 38.8 37.5 Border Price Equivalent (a) 36.4 35.8 64.7 295.3 16,689.4 262,933.7 383,814.5 39.8 35.8 Quantity 1 Ton 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Value at Border Price Equivalent 36.4 35.8 64.7 295.3 16,689.4 262,933.7 383,814.5 39.8 35.8 2. TRADABLE DIRECT INPUTS Insecticide Quantity LT Per MT of Output 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 Domestic Price $Arg Per Lt 3.2 3.6 5.5 36.2 369.1 23,360.7 36,905.2 4.1 4.0 Domestic Cost 0.8 0.9 1.4 9.4 96.0 6,073.8 9,595.4 1.1 1.1 Border Price Eq. Price $Arg Per Lt 3.2 3.6 5.0 32.9 320.9 21,237.0 36.905.2 3.8 3.4 Border Price Eq. Cost 0.8 0.9 1.3 8.6 83.4 5,521.6 9,595.4 1.0 0.9 Herbicide Quantity LT Per MT of Output 0.40 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 Domestic Price SArg Per Lt 2.5 0.8 1.2 7.7 121.2 6,363.0 9,763.3 1.0 1.0 Domestic Cost 1.0 0.9 1.4 8.4 132.2 6,941.5 10,650.9 1.1 1.1 Border Pice Eq. Price SArg Per Lt 2.5 0.8 1.1 7.0 91.8 5,302.5 8,795.7 0.8 0.9 Border Price Eq. Cost 1.0 0.9 1.2 7.7 100.1 5,784.5 9,595.4 0.9 0.9 Total Direct Inputs (Domestic Prices) 1.8 1.8 2.8 17.9 228.1 13,015.2 20,246.2 2.1 2.1 Total Direct Inputs (Border Price) 1.8 1.8 2.5 16.2 183.6 11,306.2 19,190.7 1.9 1.8 3. TRADABLE INDIRECT INPUTS Machinery Quantity Hours Per MT of Output 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 Domestic PNice SArg Per Hour 3.5 2.2 4.5 34.6 1,962.7 20,431.7 35,587.3 4.5 3.9 Domestic Cost 5.3 3.3 6.7 52.0 2,944.0 30,647.6 53,380.9 6.8 5.9 Border PNice Eq. Price SArg Per Hour 2.6 1.6 3.0 22.6 1,401.9 16,477.2 29,169.9 4.0 3.9 Border Price Eq. Cost 3.9 2.4 4.5 34.0 2,102.9 24,715.8 43,754.8 6.0 5.9 Fuel & Oil Quantity LT Per MT of Output 10.37 10.37 10.37 10.37 10.37 10.37 10.37 10.37 10.37 Domestic PNice SArg Per Lt 0.4 0.3 0.5 4.0 230.1 2,398.6 2,775.9 0.4 0.3 Domestic Cost 4.4 2.7 5.4 41.9 2,386.6 24,873.5 28,786.1 3.6 3.2 Border Price Eq. Price SArg Per Lt 0.3 0.2 0.4 4.0 230.1 2,180.5 2,775.9 0.3 0.3 Border Price Eq. Cost 3.6 2.2 4.1 41.9 2,386.6 22,612.3 28,786.1 3.5 3.2 Total Indirect Inputs (Domestic Prices) 9.7 6.0 12.1 93.9 5,330.6 55,521.1 82,167.0 10.4 9.1 Total Indirect Inputs (Border Price) 7.5 4.6 8.7 75.9 4,489.4 47,328.1 72,540.9 9.5 9.1 4. VALUE ADDED Direct Inputs Only At Domestic Prices 21.0 22.0 45.2 269.1 11,289.4 186,434.2 330,759.7 36.7 35.4 At International Prices 34.6 34.1 62.1 279.1 16,505.8 251,627.6 364,623.7 37.9 34.0 Direct & Indirect Inputs At Domestic Prices 11.3 16.0 33.1 175.2 5,958.8 130,913.1 248,592.7 26.3 26.3 At International Prices 27.1 29.4 53.5 203.2 12,016.3 204,299.5 292,082.8 28.4 24.9 5. EPR -58.3% -45.5% 38.1% -13.8% 50.4% -35.9% -14.% -7.5% 5.7% a. From 1985-1991, the official currency was the australe. Effective 1/1/92, it was the peso argentino. The prices in local currency reported here reflect the differences in exchange rate. Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 TABLE А-5с STANDARI2ED FORMAT PRODUCER SUBSIDY EQUIVALENT Cpnвlr: Мрвпив Турв: ЕарогlвЫв СаlммМу: 5огуlвwn lвввl: f�п 1l�0 1lt1 19t2 1fQ 1l64 1М6 /Mi 1l�7 1!р 1l69 1l90 1s91 1992 1!!3 Mвrket Vв1ие о1 Outpul Qп1нЛ 111о�ивпlв о1 1оiк1 6.200 4,000 З.ООО Э.200 1.500 2.017 2.254 2.131 2.&16 1Усв Риг 1ап 111 _ 2Э 24 49 287 11.519 199.И9 Э51.008 39 37 io1a1 Mr4u1 VM�e о1 QnpullMNona) О О 0 О О 111 95 114 851 17,278 402,2В9 791,187 94 109 Аввеlпсе (Mi11bм) Me.kr11'�и Suppul 1В41 1181 1501 1т71 17.75В1 112В.О481 174.0521 121 5 ма.k.1�п11 w,■е 1 т s 2s se7 7,4ЭЭ 1е,12з о о 1пр�1 Ро1в:л 0 0 0 0 О 0 0 0 0 GоАп �квгепси 0 о О 0 О О 0 0 О pnwвch 6 Едlввпоп 0 1 2 10 247 6,06В 11,413 3 3 Тоtв1 Аввiвtвnсв 0 О 0 0 О 1831 1451 рЭ1 В 17,0431 (114,цЛ 113,4В81 0 8 Ргодисег 5uбsidy Equiиlent -58.8% �47.7% -ЭО.О% 1.0% �10.6% -2В.5% 5.5% 0.Э% 7.3`.: 7 from l9В5-1991, prices впрrецед м виамвks рег МТ. А/гм 1991, in рево� .rрепмв pes МТ. 7. PSE e�tйn�tes до гюt inclиде е�ргпдпигеа о{ Ме Ммооry о1 Apricuhvro. TABLE А-ба Standardized Format Nominal Rate of Protection Соипtгу: АгеепГпе Туре: ЕrуопвЫе СОТтодпу' SОУЬЕЕПе Рот[ о1 Сотреппоп� Вогдег �9.5 139G 1�� �9@ 1�В.У 1 0 �2 >Э.�i 39.1 1. UNADJUSTED BORDER PR1CE Елскп9е Плtе 1с1 0 75 О.ВЬ 1.БВ 7.55 2Э7 20 5141.97 9В1з 13 1.0 1.0 Вогдег Hice 6U9 FOB Топ 199.В 1в7.8 202 3 2В3 6 256 В 215.3 208 5 1В3.2 201.В Впгдег R¢е т Loca1 Сипепсу 149.7 162 2 740 4 2,141 2 60,901.1 1,106,80В.5 х,04В.036.6 182 3 200.В 2. BORDER ADJUSTMENTS Tлnflвl5ubsioies/АФиsгтепи 1в1 148.11 146 21 15В.21 13Э7 91 120,9В0.41 13Э7.576 61 1214,ВЭЗ.В1 113 71 17.01 12в19тгеgеМвпдЬпg/гоев х з 2.2 х 7 1В.1 1,о18 1 1В,За1.0 10AZ4.s о.7 о з Роп СкгВлв 14 51 15.21 110.11 (45.31 11,423 21 170,В51.81 158,87В.81 1В.01 16 01 9tongeMendbnp/Lпва Чоrvlпгеrvепоап Опh (7.01 (7 61 (16.01 (101 71 (2,ВВб.21 l52.211.01 19б.427.31 (8 61 f9 51 Вогоы Рпсе Epuivslem lwnn тгегvепЬопl 92.4 105.4 260 В 1,678.4 ЭБ,Б29 4 702.550 1 1,Бв6,321.е 154 7 179.6 Вогды Aice Fqиvelem lwпгюи[ �меrvепиопl 13В 2 1s9.4 314 2 1,994.2 56.591.7 1,023,)45.7 1.в90.770.6 187.7 1В6.3 З. COSTS FROM BORDER ТО PROCESSING (ИгЧОLЕSАLЕ MARKET) ТвпМв/5uhsqies/AAlustmeпtв 7rемроп.поп - 17.51 19.б1 116 в1 1125.В1 12.бл9 31 192,757.51 1157.613.л1 13.91 (6.11 огкг В«ды Рпсе Ериrвbм вNо Processhy lwnh иlervenbaN в5.0 96.0 244.0 1,552 6 33,9В0.1 609,79х.6 1,52В,70в.2 150 в 174.6 Вогды Рпсе Ериivеlепг епег Prосessirq 1wi[ки iмerveмionl 130.7 140.0 297.6 1,вВ8.4 53.962.5 930,98В.1 1,773,117.2 18Э.8 1В1.7 4. PROCESSING СО5Т 1WHOLE$ALE MARKETI Твп11s/5uhs�dies/Atlluвtments 1Ы Commissiorц 6 Taxes З л Э.З з.7 22.1 1,В96 2 25.631 4 18,784.7 1.0 0.9 Ргосеамр Cos13 13.71 14 01 1в.31 158.51 11,340.31 131.126.71 164,542 В1 111.81 113.81 Mertдme Мвг9пц Огкг ИостlмеrvепгiопСаттилюпв l7.61 l8.21 117.31 110971 f3,112.51 f56,306.01 f103.990.21 f921 f10.21 NorиlnlnvenlaпTe:es 12.в1 13.01 14.71 129.91 12.2ВЗ.71 1хБ,Jев.91 189.578.91 1з31 14.11 Cornenion 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 воге.г vnn Еуй.вюпг м1ог. мосевьп9lwпп ьтеrvепмпl 74.з еа.1 2ю.8 1,з7е.е 29,159s 522,в02.3 1,ЭОSаы 1 12z4 1и.4 Вогды Рпи Еqиrvвlвм мlого Rосевогр (wrtмut ицегrапGопl 116.6 124.В 267 2 1,В72.З 47,226.0 81в.166 5 1,495.005.Э 139.4 153.1 5. СО5Т5 FROM COLLECTION РО1НТ 1FANM1 ТО PNOCES50R Ти11Ч9иЬыGюв/Аоlиптеп[i Trвnsportnbn 01мr вогдег Рпсв Equrвlent вг Совкtюп Р«т lwnh interven[юп1 74.3 е4.1 217 6 1.37в.6 29.159.9 621.602.3 1.309.зв1.1 127.4 147д вогбегРлсеьа...имесайе«ьопРоигl.мкигмw.мюпl 11в.е 124.е zв7.2 1,е72.3 47,2хе.0 е1е,16в.в 1,496,ао8.3 139.4 1ьз.1 в. DOMESTIC PR1CE еагдвг . YV1pb.W 74.3 е4.1 217.5 1.З7В.6 29.159.9 522.602.3 1.309.Зб1.1 1х7.4 147.! совмрпЕымlЕ.по1 н.з ев.1 21zs 1,яе.е хв.1ь9.9 sх2.во2.з 1,з09,зв1.1 1xz4 игв 7. иРп е«ды -з3.1х -2я.4х лzОх л8.ех а5.зх -з1.4х -10.ех -zex а.ех wnd...м ае.зх ах.вх лв.вх лzвх зе.зх авлх -1х.ах е.вк -Злх СаЧс[юп Рдп[ 1Fмп1 .. Ам,rгыныо..lож,.,: а9еьы.lх, 19вв-2в.ьх,19е7-1еsх, 19eвassx, 19вв-заz, 799азо.8х, 1991ао.вх, 79еьгьх.го 1в9з-з.sх. Ь. TNS 1w пqговмU в сопесгюп to the м[еrvамип price ta ьсапи 1« йllагегпл и севt nrunure о1 iмеrvемюп вгН поп-interventbn prices. Gпвiп совtв, ье. вt«в9eRNndlinpMи впд сомнniоги впд имв вго июдвtад Ьу вррlуiпр е еопвtмг to hoen гм iпгеrvыкоп впа гомпгеrvепгмп мил. Т1ьа та0адаюру vиwл гиго ипв. ноwеrы. гк гвЬи омr м«r 1:а т ваоигп 1« гм еовt. Ав в тип. вqиппюмв вго пrавамае т гми wав ro вгкаж 1« Br Ui1lМыюв п Мв lrro ргiСа. о. Rom 79в61991. гм ы/кiвl дrгом,у wи tм wutrW. EHSC6w 1ltp2, rt ывв tlr рЧо врвпгro. Soutce: Surve1/lепсе Pmjeet, LATAO, 1995 TABLE A-6b Standardized Format Effective Rate of Protection Country: Argon- Type: Export" Commodity; Saytisains Level: Form 1. OUTPUT Domestic Price (a) 74.3 84.1 217.5 1,378.6 29,159.9 522,602.3 1,309,361.1 127.4 147.4 Quantity I Ton 0 -1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Value at Domestic Prices 74.3 84.1 217.5 1.378.6 29,159.9 522,602.3 1,309,361.1 127.4 147.4 Border Price Equivalent [a) 115.6 124.8 267.2 1,672.3 47,226.0 818.166.5 1,49S,005.3 139.4 163.1 Quantity 1 Ton 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Vskie at Border Price Equivalent 116.6 124.8 267.2 1.672.3 47,226.0 819,166.5 1,495.005.3 139.4 163.1 2. TRADABLE DIRECT INPUTS Seeds Quantity KG Par MT of Output 36.36 38.36 36.36 36.36 36.36 36.36 36.36 36.36 36.38 Domestic Price $Arg Per KG 0.1 0.2 0.3 2.9 57.7 1,261.2 3,008.3 0.4 0.4 Domestic Cost 4.8 7.6 12.3 106.5 2,099.5 45,862.1 109,393.3 13.0 15.3 Border Price Eq. Price Oft Per KG 0.2 0.3 0.4 3.6 93.6 1,974.5 3,434.8 0.4 0.4 Border Price Eq. Cost 7.6 11.2 15.1 129.2 3.400.3 71,1300.0 124,903.4 14,2 15.9 Insecticide Quantity LT Per MT of Output 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.88 0.68 0.68 Domestic Price *Arg Par Lt 5.0 7.2 14.4 77.7 2,389.6 75,945.1 160,201.9 19.6 27.7 Domestic Cost 3.4 4.9 9.8 53.0 1,629.3 51.780.8 109,228.6 13.3 18.9 Border Price Eq. Price $Arg Par Lt 5.0 7.2 13.1 70.0 2,077.9 69,041.0 160,201.9 18.1 23.e Border Price Eq. Cost 3.4 4.9 8.9 48.1 1,416.8 47,073.4 109,228.6 12.4 16.1 Herbicide Quantity LT Par MT of Output 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 Domestic Price Mfg Per Lt 3.3 4.3 8.4 47.2 1,952.6 68,350.6 126,257.0 13.4 16.2 Domestic Cost 3.6 4.7 9.1 51.5 2,130.1 74,564.3 137,734.9 14.6 17.6 VII Border Price Eq. Price SArg Per Lt 3.3 4.3 7.6 42.9 1,479.3 56,958.8 113,745.0 11.0 13.8 Border Price Eq. Cost 3.6 4.7 8.3 40.8 1,613.7 62,136.9 124,085.5 12.6 15.0 Total Direct Inputs (Domestic Prices) 11.8 17.2 31.3 211.0 5,858.9 172,207.2 356,356.8 40.9 51.9 Total Direct Inputs (Border Price) 14.6 20.9 32.4 224.2 6,430.8 181.010.4 358,217.4 39.1 47.0 3. TRADABLE INDIRECT INPUTS Machinery Quantity Hours Per MT of Output 3.41 3.41 3.41 3.41 3.41 3.41 3.41 3.41 3.41 Domestic Price IlArg Par Hour 7.4 7.2 18.6 117.0 2,830.8 38,677.0 52,952.1 5.4 4.2 Domestic Cost 25.1 24.4 63.3 399.1 9,653.0 131,888.4 180,666.7 18.4 14.4 Border Price Eq. Price IiArg Par Hour 5.3 5.2 12.5 76.5 2,022.0 31,191.1 43.403.4 4.8 4.2 Border Price Eq. Cost 18.2 17.7 42.7 260.9 6,895.0 106,361.7 148,005.6 16.4 14.4 Fuel & Oil Quantity LT Per IVIT of Output 23.57 23.57 23.57 23.57 23.57 23.57 23.57 23.57 23.57 Domestic Price $Arg Per Lt 0.6 0.6 1.4 4.2 142.3 3,398.3 2,604.0 0.4- 0.3 Domestic Cost 14.0 13.6 34.0 98.7 3,353.0 80,098.5 62,790.2 8.6 7.8 Border Price Eq. Price IlAra Par Lt 0.5 0.5 1.1 4.2 142.3 3,089.4 2,664.0 0.3 0.3 Border Price Eq. Cost 11.5 11.2 25.9 98.7 3,353.0 72,815.8 62.790.2 8.2 7.8 Total Indirect Inputs (Domestic Prices) 39.1 38.0 97.2 497.8 13,006.0 211.987.0 243,357.0 27.1 22.2 Total Indirect Inputs (Border Price) 29.7 28.9 68.7 369.5 10,248.0 179,178.5 210,795.8 24.7 22.2 4. VALUE ADDED Direct Inputs Only At Domestic Prices 62.5 66.9 186.2 1,167.6 23,301.0 350.395.2 953,004.3 86.5 95.5 At International Prices 102.0 103.9 234.8 1,448.1 40,795.2 637,156.2 1,136.787.9 100.2 106.1 Direct & Indirect Inputs At Domestic Prices 23.4 28.8 89.0 669.8 10.294.9 138,408.2 709,647.4 59.4 73.3 At International Prices 72.3 75.0 160.2 1,088.6 30,547.2 457,977.7 925,992.2 75.6 83.9 5. EPR -67.7% -131.5% -48.4% -38.S% -66.3% -69.8% -23.4% -21.4% -12.6% a. From 1985-1991, the official currency was the australe. Effective 1/1/92, It was the peso argentino. The prices in local currency reported here reflect the differences in exchange rate. Source: Surviefflance iomiect, LATAD, 1995 TABLE A-dc STANDARIZED FORMAT PRODUCER SUBSIDY EQUIVALENT Cony: Argent~ Type: Exprtb1~ Commodity: Sybsrw Lovel: Farm 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 19a 18I 1987 18 in@a 1~0 191 1982 1993 Market Value of Output Output (Ihou~d of Ton1 0,500 7.100 0.700 9,900 0.500 10,00 10,090 10.525 11,018 Pr" f` Ton (Il 74 04 210 1,379 29.100 522,002 1,309.301 12 147 Twal Moker V.k.e of Outpt (M~hne 0 0 0 0 0 493 597 1,457 13,048 199.539 5.501.393 14.004.920 1,350 1,019 Assistence (Millions) Maket Pre Support (2751 (209 (333 <2.911) (117.4101 (3,150.029) 41,905.0521 (127) t0a Muk.eg Bord 10 24 07 355 0,559 104.282 220,208 0 0 input Pokice 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cled.t AseI.nMe 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rerch&Exens.~n 0 11 31 152 3,817 93,079 222.903 41 48 Totd Awwis~arce 0 0 0 0 0 (2531 (254< (235 <2.4041 (107.034) (2950,600 (1,530.4001 (t0) (201 Producer Suuidy Eqveient -52.3% -42.5% -10.1% -17.0% -50.5% -53.0% .11.0% .0.3% -1.2% 1. From 1986-I 991 prc~s expreseds~ ieut~es per MT, After 1991. i pesows -gen per MT. 2. PSE .suires do not bechude expentdfness of she eirls0sy of Arceure. TABLE A-7a Standardized Format Nominal Rate of Protection Country: Argentina Type: Exportable Commodity: Sunflower Point of Competition: Border 1285 1288 112ZU 188 28 L20 .L921 1922 123 1. UNADJUSTED BORDER PRICE Exchange Rate (c) 0.66 0.86 1.68 7.55 237.20 5141.97 9813.13 1.0 1.0 Border Price $US FOB Ton 235.2 173.3 179.0 251.3 227.5 212.4 192.8 162.3 221.0 Border Price in Local Currency 155.2 149.6 301.2 1,895.9 53,963.0 1.091,896.8 1,891,970.5 161.5 219.9 2. BORDER ADJUSTMENTS Tariffs/Subsdis/AdAustments (a) 149.8) (38.2) (49.7) (218.0) (18,050.6) (343.947.5) (198,656.9) (12.1) (7.7) (b) Storage/Handling/Loss 2.4 1.9 2.4 10.6 875.9 16690.1 9,639.9 0.8 0.4 Port Charges (4.0) (5.2) (10.1) (45.3) (1,423.2) (30,851.8) 158.878.8 (5.0) (5.0) Storage/Handling/Losis Non-Intervention Only 17.3) (7.0) (14.1) (89.8) (2,549.5) (51.487.4) (88,951.2) (7.6) (10.4) Border Price Equivalent (with intervention) 96.5 101.1 229.7 1,553.4 32.815.6 682,300.2 1,555,123.5 137.4 197.2 Border Price Equivalent (without intervention) 143.9 137.4 277.0 1,780.8 49,990.3 1,009,533.1 1,744,093.9 148.9 204.5 3. COSTS FROM BORDER TO PROCESSING (WHOLESALE MARKET) TariffalSubsidies/Adjustments Transportation (12.5) (13.8) (23.7) (199.7) (3,610.7) (122,108.5) (241,566.1) (5.7) (9.0) Other Border Price Equivalent after Processing (with intervention) 84.0 87.3 208.1 1,353.7 29,204.9 560,191.7 1,313,557.5 131.7 188.1 Border Price Equivalent after Processing (without intervention) 131.4 123.6 253.3 1,561.2 46,379.6 887,424.6 1,502,527.8 143.3 195.5 4. PROCESSING COST (WHOLESALE MARKET) Tariffs/Subsidies/Adjustments (b) Commissions & Taxes 3.6 2.7 3.3 14.5 1,631.7 26.114.5 17,351.3 0.9 0.5 Processing Costs (3.0) (3.5) (9.6) (60.0) (1,322.4) (23,819.8) (54,136.6) (18.1) (21.6) Marketing Margins Other Non-Intervention Commissions (7.9) (7.6) (15.2) (96.8) (2,749.5) (55,524.3) (95,925.2) (8.2) (11.2) Non-intervention Taxes (2.9) (2.7) (4.2) (26.4) (1,999.6) (25,036.4) (64,182.7) (3.0) (4.1) Conversion 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Border Price Equivalent before Processing (with intervention) 73.8 76.3 180.4 1,184.9 24,765.1 481,925.7 1,116,664.4 103.3 151.8 Border Price Equivalent before Processing (without intervention) 117.6 109.8 224.4 1.377.9 40,308.2 783,044.1 1,288,283.4 114.0 158.5 5. COSTS FROM COLLECTION POINT (FARM) TO PROCESSOR Tarifts/Subsidies/Adjustments Transportation Other Border Price Equivalent at Collection Point (with intervention) 73.8 76.3 180.4 1.184.9 24,765.1 481,925.7 1,116,664.4 103.3 151.8 Border Price Equivalent at Collection Point (without intervention) 117.6 109.8 224.4 1,377.9 40,308.2 783.044.1 1,288,283.4 114.0 158.5 6. DOMESTIC PRICE Border Wholesale 73.8 76.3 180.4 1,184.9 24,765.1 481,925.7 1.116,664.4 103.3 151.8 Collection Point (Farm) 73.8 76.3 180.4 1,184.9 24,765.1 481,925.7 1,116,664.4 103.3 151.8 7 NPR Border -32.9% -26.4% .17.1% -11.8% -34.4% -32.4% -10.8% -7.7% -3.6% Wholesale -37.3% -30.6% -19.6% -14.0% -38.6% -38.5% -13.3% -9.4% -4.3% Collection Point (Farm) a. Annual tariffs are as follows: 1985-32.1%, 1988-25.5%, 1987-16.5%, 1988-11.5%, 1989-33%, 1990-31.5%, 1991-10.5%, 1992-7.5% and 1993-3.5%. b Thu line represents a correction to the rntervent.on price to acount for difterences incost structure of ntercention and no-intercenthon prices. Certain costs, ,e storiagrandlirngAoss and commissions and tees are calculated by applymg a constant to both the inerverion and norninterenmon once.. TNs methodlogy yelds two cogs. However, rho table only has one lie to accont for the cost As result, adjustments are presented in these Iines to account for the ditfferne in the two pricen. c From 1985 1991. the official currency wa the austrae. Effect-we 11192, it was the pesoargentino Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 TABLE A-7b Standardized Format Effective Rate of Protection Country Argentina Type: Exportable Commodity: Sunflower Level: Farm 1. OUTPUT Domestic Price (a) 73.8 76.3 180.4 1,184.9 24,765.1 481,925.7 1,116,664.4 103.3 151.8 Quantity I Ton 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Value at Domestic Prices 73.8 76.3 180.4 1,184.9 24,765.1 481,925.7 1,116,664.4 103.3 151.8 Border Price Equivalent (a) 117.6 109.8 224.4 1,377.9 40,308.2 783,044.1 1,288,283.4 114.0 158.5 Quantity I Ton 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Value at Border Price Equivalent 117.6 109.8 224.4 1,377.9 40,308.2 783,044.1 1,288,283.4 114.0 158.5 .0.373 -0.306 -0.196 .0.140 .0.386 -0.385 -0.133 -0.094 -0.042 2. TRADABLE DIRECT INPUTS Insecticide Quantity LT Per MT of Output 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 Domestic Price $Arg Per Lt 4.8 4.3 9.5 50.8 979.5 42,989.1 80,002.4 9.5 9.0 Domestic Cost 5.3 4.7 11.6 62.1 1,251.6 52,542.3 88,891.6 11.5 11.7 Border Price Eq. Price (Arg Per Lt 4.8 4.3 9.5 50.8 979.5 42,989.1 80,002.4 9.8 9.0 Border Price Eq. Cost 5.3 4.7 10.5 56.5 1,088.3 47,765.7 88,891.6 10.6 10.0 Herbicide Quantity LT Per MT of Output 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 Domestic Price SArg Per Lt 8.8 5.8 11.3 72.8 1,402.7 58,258.5 105,123.9 10.8 11.4 Domestic Cost 5.6 4.8 10.4 68.7 1,543.0 58,258.5 97,239.6 10.4 11.2 Border Price Eq. Price 4Arg Per Lt 6.8 5.8 11.3 72.8 1,402.7 58,258.5 105,123.9 10.8 11.4 Border Price Eq. Cost 5.6 4.8 9.4 80.6 1,188.9 48,548.7 87,603.3 9.0 9.5 Total Direct Inputs (Domestic Prices) 10.9 9.6 22.0 128.8 2,794.6 110,800.7 186,131.2 21.9 22.9 Total Direct inputs (Border Price) 10.9 8.6 20.0 117.1 2.257.3 96,314.4 176,494.8 19.6 19.5 3. TRADABLE INDIRECT INPUTS Machinery Quantity Hours Per MT of Output 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 Domestic Price $Arg Per Hour 3.8 2.6 5.6 35.4 1,232.4 20,039.3 36,209.2 3.9 4.2 Domestic Cost 15.7 10.9 23.2 147.6 5,135.3 83,503.8 150,883.8 16.1 17.6 Border Price Eq. Price IArg Per Hour 2.7 1.9 3.8 23.1 880.3 16,160.7 29,679.7 3.4 4.2 Border Price Eq. Cost 11.4 7.9 15.7 96.5 3,668.0 67,341.8 123,675.2 14.4 17.6 Fuel & Oil Quantity LT Per MT of Output 28.80 28.80 28.80 28.80 28.80 28.80 28.80 28.80 28.80 Domestic Price SArg Per Lt 0.4 0.3 0.7 4.2 144.2 2,362.7 2,862.9 0.3 0.3 Domestic Cost 12.7 8.9 18.8 119.9 4,151.7 68,046.5 82,450.1 8.9 9.5 Border Price Eq. Price $Arg Per Lt 0.4 0.3 0.5 4.2 144.2 2,147.9 2,862.9 0.3 0.3 Border Price Eq. Cost 10.5 7.4 14.4 119.9 4,151.7 61,860.5 82,450.1 8.4 9.5 Total Indirect Inputs (Domestic Prices) 28.4 19.8 42.1 267.4 9,287.0 151,550.3 233,333.9 24.9 27.1 Total Indirect Inputs (Border Price) 21.9 15.3 30.1 218.3 7,819.8 129.202.3 206,125.4 22.8 27.1 4. VALUE ADDED Direct Inputs Only At Domestic Prices 62.9 6.7 158.5 1,056.1 21,970.5 371,125.0 930,533.2 81.4 128.9 At International Prices 108.7 100.3 204.4 1,260.7 38,050.9 686,729.6 1,111,788.6 94.4 139.0 Direct & Indirect Inputs At Domestic Prices 34.5 46.9 116.4 788.7 12,883.5 219,574.6 897,199.3 56.5 101.8 At International Prices 84.8 85.0 174.4 1,044.4 30,231.1 557,527.4 905,663.3 71.0 111.9 5. EPR -59.4% -44.8% -33.2% -24.5% .58.0% -60.6% -23.0% -21.1% .9.0% a. From 1985-1991, the official currency was the australe. Effective 1/1/92, it was the peso argentino. The prices in local currency reported here reflect the differences in exchange rate. Source: Surveance Project, LA TAD, 1995 TABLE А-7с STANDARIZED FORMAT PRODUCER SUBSIDY EQU1VAlENT Соипо�: Аlрвмnв TvW� ЕврогtвЬfв СОтгподоУ: 5иП14wвг Lвvвl: FвгТ lясо 1ое1 1ас2 ивs 1ав4 ивс lвве 1an lввв lося vво 1аа1 1яя2 lааа Мвг4е[ Ув1w of Output atwr пnоиви,ав о1 1а,в1 злоо 4.1ао 2.2ао 2.э1s э.2оо з.9оо э.s9/ з.2s7 z.eo9 ег1[. Ри топ111 7в 7е 1ео 1 1es 2в.7ев веl.9яе 1.11а.еа �оэ 1si rог� м.к.[ v.►1. о1 аlри[ 1мlхдп.l о о о о о 2s1 эtз э97 э.вsв 79,2ве 1.a9s1o в.вss.9se эзе 12s Аввiвtвпи (MiYionв) M.bt Rм 5ирра[ (1/9) 11э81 1971 15е21 119.7411 11.17/.1311 1685.011) 1э51 1191 миыг.w т.а в s 1s 79 1.вsа 2э.2ое sо.э2э о о 1пр1[ vокв. о о о о о о о о о Gвди Авввtимs о о о о 0 о о 0 0 Чои.�м а¢.[и,.1оп 2 в 11 st t.2ea з1.е2/ 7s тZ5 _ 1в 1е то[r А..1.[и,о. о о о о о 11вз1 11291 ип иэ21 tвс.яяэl n.1la.eou 1seo.olel 1гп 1э1 woauca сиьдеr Ечд.rм[ •s7.ж �/1.1х ле.ох л2.вх �ss.эx •sa.ex �12.вх �а.2х �о.сх 1. Fiaл !!8F /991, qcвs влрnsаиО in вusbalвs ра а/Т. ARвr /!9!, ro авsц вrpвntlrr pr А1Т. 1. Р5Е вsоiпвtвв Оо пег 'rк7идв иОвг[дiпrвв о/ tlи AMia6Y д Aprirtatwв. TABLE А-8а Standardizвd Foпnat Nominal Rate ot Protection Сом[гу: Аryмtlпв Тура: Е�мtаЬN Commodiclr: W1ивt РоМ of Сотрвtlбоп: Вогдаг 18ES 19HQ 19flZ ].99В ].@Н8 ].99f! 1991 ]992 1$!� 1. UNA0.1U5TED B011DER PNCE Eкrhrqa Rпв 1е1 0-Э2 0.81 1.ц 4.72 27.12 Э,7ВЭ.07 8.798.25 1.00 1.00 Вогдег Рдр t1U5 FOB Топ 111.5 10Э.8 � 88.0 101-Э 169.3 147.8 102-9 115.4 121.0 во.дылк.ь+�«ысип.псr ЭS.х ез.е 12е-7 47z7 в,з1е.1 ьь5,е9Э.z 9о5.1м.о п4.е 1х0.4 2. BORDER AOJUBTMENTS TariNвlSubaidaa/AOjwdмnY W (В.9) (13.81 18.21 17.21 (951.Т 1140.888.31 (40.732.41 11.71 3.0 (Ы StarвpdNrrдWg/LOU 0.Э 0.7 0.4 0.3 И.2 8,825.9 1,978.5 0.1 (0.11 Pbrt Chrpaa (1.81 14.81 (8.81 128.Э) 1182.71 122.678.41 (52.7е9.51 15.01 (5.0) 5tогврвМмдiрАди ноп-иlм.пап опw n.e1 (3.в1 1ь.л 121.е1 1zo1.e1 1zь,ееа.п ч11.зы .71 (5.з1 г5.в1 Вогды Рг1р Eq<1vWnt (wHh Yпarvantlonl 25.2 82.0 101.6 420.7 3,048.2 Э7Э,890-3 772,257.0 102.9 112.7 Вогдег Ргiсв Equivalaп lwiдюгп пtaroantioN 31.7 75.1 112.Э 427.8 3.853.8 507.530.8 В11,012.8 16t.5 109.8 Э. СО5Т5 FROM BORDEП ТО PROCESSING ПNHOLESALE MARKET) Tadff а/S W aid'иЧAdjwtmмta 7тероппiоп (3.51 19.21 110.81 138.31 1349.21 (48,В97.В1 1155,50В.21 (4.В1 14.81 Оtlж Вогды Рпр EpuivaNnг ahr Procaasirp 1wiM imarwntionl 21.8 52.7 9Э.7 Э82.5 2.899.1 326,992.8 818.750.7 98.0 107.8 Вогды Prka Equlvalent aftм Ргосеsвiпр 1wlдюи lmarventbnl 2В.2 65.9 101.5 389.Э 3,604.6 480,833.0 855,508.8 99.7 105.0 4. PROCESSIHG COST (VJHOLESALE MARKET) TariHslSubsid'юs/Adjuпmenb 1Ы Commissions 6. Taxas 0.5 7.0 0.5 0.5 63.4 10,880.5 3,470.6 0.1 10.21 Ргопаiгр Соки 10.В1 12.01 (3.01 113.41 187.51 110,237.41 118,В37.81 11Э.71 112.81 Мыkедгр Мырагs Othsr Иоп-Иtыvention Commis>tons (1.71 (4.11 (6.21 123.51 1217.51 127,914.21 1ц.605.71 15.71 (6.01 Non-lntsrvention Taxes 10.81 (1.51 (1.71 16.41 (59.Э1 112,588.81 128.081.01 12.61 (2.31 Conversbn 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Вогды Prics Equivabnt before Proceseinp (wrth intervмtionl 19.0 46.1 83.4 339.6 2.398.2 266.940.7 528,716.7 76.1 В8.5 Вогдаг Price Equivalent Ьеlоге Procassinp lwithout intarvention) 25.0 58.Э 90.7 346.0 3,240.3 410,100.8 584,042.0 77.6 В3.8 Б. СО5Т5 FROM COLLECTION РО1ИТ IFARMI ТО PAOCE550R ТапИS/5ubs1dles/Adjustmмts Transportation Other Вогдег Рпсе Equivalиt а[ Collection Point (with intervantion) 19.0 46.1 83.4 339.6 2,Э98.2 268,940.7 528,718.7 78.1 86.5 Вогдег Price Epuivalent а[ Collection Point (whhout intenentionl 25.0 58.3 90.7 346.0 3,240.3 410,100.6 564,042.0 77.6 83.8 8. DOMESTIC PR1CE Вогдег Wholesale 19.0 46.1 83.4 339.6 2,398.2 288,940.7 528,718.7 78.1 88.5 Collection Point(Farm1 19.0 46.1 8Э.4 339.6 2,398.2 286,940.7 528,71В.7 76.1 86.5 7. NPR Вогдаг -20.6% -17.5% -7.0% -1.6% -22.9% -26.4% -4.8% -1.6% 2.8% Wholeeale -24.2% -20.9% -8.0% -1.8% -2В.0% -30.0% -6.3% -1.9% 3.2% Соllепгоп РоИ[ 1Farm1 а. Аппиаl [ariffs аге as tollows: 1985-19.5%, 1986-18.5%, 1987-6.5%. 1988-1.5%, 1989-1.5%, 1990-25.3%, 1991-4.5% апд 1992-1.5%. 1993 has ап ехроп subsldy оТ 2.5% а. 7he bm геугевепtе е сапкtюП т tM iмеrvепlюП ргее т всwпt 1ог ддlвгвпсе. т can atructura ot mtervarni0п впд поттгегvегпi0п рппs Сепет сОпtв. �.е. stOnOe/пвпдLпрПОкк епд сОттипОпв апд texes sre ceicNe7etl Ьу во7И�пр е соrи[вП[ IO DOm [М �mervemiOП апд голт[еrvепtЮп yncai The Tetn0d01ppy yial0e rw0 СОЯе HOWlvег. Ihe Ielile ОП1у hef ОМ 1iM l0 в[с0иП1 10г ик с0в1. Ав в ГlN11, вдryвtтете аге Огееепlед т Itкee ЬПе5I0 есСаиП[ 10г гМ д�llегвпсв т tne lW0 Р^Cei. с FrOm 79857997, гМ Ofheиl сипепry wes [пе wкггвlе. Е1lыгvе 1/7/92, п wu [1и рвsо вг0ет�по. Sоигсе: Surveillапсе PrOject, LATAO, 1995 TABLE А- 8В Standarized Format Effective Rate of Protection СоиП[[У: Arpentine Туре: Ехрог[аЫа CommoditY: wneat Leve1: Ferm 1�@@ 1В� S8� 13Н.@ �8 1�,4Q 1.@21 ]�.4Z � 1. OUTPUT Domeanc Ргiге 1а1 19.0 46.1 83л 339.6 2,398.3 2в6,940.7 628,757.3 76.1 86.5 Оиап[1[у 1 7оп 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 velue ес Domestic PriceS 19.0 16.1 83.4 339.8 2,398.Э 2вь,940.7 52в.757.3 76.1 86.5 вогдег Ргiге Eqиvalent 1а1 25.0 58.3 90.7 348.0 3,24о.3 410,100.6 584,042.0 77.6 вЭ.в O.uancity 1 Топ 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Va1ue а[ еогдег Rice Eqиvalent 25.0 5в.3 90.7 346.0 3,240.3 410,100.8 584,042.0 77.6 в3.8 2. TRADABLE DIHECT 1NPUT5 Sведя Ouantity кG Рег М7 о1 Output И.67 41.67 41.87 41.67 41.87 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 Domeaoc Рпсе еАг9 Рвг к0 о.о о.1 o.z о.7 ь.е аsе.з 1,+з4.о o.z о.2 DomeStic Cost 1.5 3.8 6.6 29.9 2вЭ.0 19,512.о 59,749.6 9.4 10.1 Вогдег Price Eq. Price lArg Per KG О.О 0.1 0.2 0.7 9 2 869.3 1,529.7 0.2 0.2 вогдег Price Eq. Cost z.o а.в zз за.4 3в2.4 z7,евб.в еэ,7э6.7 9.s s.e lпsetutide Оиапb[у LT Рег МТ 01 Output 0.42 0.42 0.42 0 42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 Domвsuc Price 8Аг9 Рег Lt 2.5 5.9 9.3 34.7 277.2 19,488.0 92.051.7 11.5 15.1 Domesec Cost 1.0 2.4 3.9 14 5 115.5 в.120.0 38,354.9 4.а В.3 Вогдег Рпге Eq. Рпсе еАг9 Рег ц 2 5 5.9 в.5 31.6 241.1 17,716.3 92,051.7 10.6 12.9 вогдвг Рпсе Eq. Со5[ 1.0 2.4 3.5 13.1 100.5 7,3в1.в 3в,354.9 4 4 5.4 Herbiatle Оиаппtу LT Рег МТ о1 Ои[ри[ 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0 46 0.46 0.46 0.48 оотеsпсРпсв 9АгрРеги 1.9 а.в е.7 зз.2 zа9.з 1а.253.2 95.62о.5 1з.б 1з.7 Domesbc Cosc 0.9 Z.2 4.0 15.2 132.6 8,366.1 43,в26.1 6.2 6.3 Вогдег Рпсе Eq. Рпсе 9Агр Рег Lt 1 9 4.в 7 9 30.2 219.2 15,211.0 86.144.6 11.7 11.7 Вогдвг Рпсв Ео. Сог[ 0.9 2 2 3.6 13.8 100.5 6,971.7 Э9,4в2.9 5.4 5.4 Tote1 Direct lnputs (Domestic Prices) 3.4 8.4 1а.6 59.6 5Э1.1 35.998.0 141,9ЭО.5 20 3 22.7 То[а1 Direct lnputs 1Etorder Prica) Э.9 9 4 14.5 57 4 583.Э а2,240.4 141,57а.5 t9.3 20.5 3. TRADABLEINDIRECTINPUTS MacNnery Оиапnгу Hours Рег М7 ог Output 3.1Э 3.13 3.13 Э.13 3.13 3.13 Э.13 3 13 3.73 Domesnc Рпсе lАг9 Рег Чоиг 1.1 2.1 4.3 17.3 132.1 17,411.9 44.921.2 5 1 3.9 DomesocCosc 3.6 6.6 13.3 54.0 412.8 54,412.2 140,378.в 160 12.1 вогдаг Рпге Eq. Рпсв еАг9 Рег нои а.е 1.5 z.9 11.3 94л и,о41.в эь,еzо.7 а.в з.9 вогдвг Рпге Егl. СоSг z.s а.в 9.о з5.3 294.9 4з,вео.е 115,ов4.s 14.з 12.1 Fue1 S Oi1 О.иапг�гу Li Рег М7 о1 Output 21.60 21.60 21.80 21.60 21.60 21.60 21.60 21.60 21.80 Domes[ic Рпсе lАгр Рвг Lt 0.1 0.Т 0.5 2.0 12 в 2,025.8 3,499.1 0.3 0.2 Domasnc Cost 2.9 5.4 1о.8 43.6 275.4 а3,757.7 75,587.8 7.5 5.4 Вогдег Prite Eq. Рпсв еАг9 Рвг и о.1 о.2 о.в z.o 1z е 1,в41.7 зл99.1 о.Э o.z вогдвг Рпсе Ег♦. СоSг 2.4 4.4 в.3 43.6 275.4 39.779.в 75,5в1.6 7.1 5.4 То[а1 lпдпвсt lnputs (Oomestic Pnceel 6.4 12.0 24.1 97.6 Вв6.2 9в,169.9 215,960.4 23 5 17.4 То[allndirect lnputs (Вогдег Rice) 5.0 9.2 17.2 78.9 570.3 в3.660.5 190,646.2 2t.4 17.4 4. VALUE ADDED Dпect lnpute Оп�у Аг Domeatic Pnces 15.6 37.7 68.7 2в0.1 1,867.2 250,942.7 3вб,в26.В 55.8 63.8 А[ lntsrnational Prices 21.1 48.в 76.2 28в.5 2,857.1 367,в60.3 422,467.4 58.3 63.3 Direгt Ь lпдпасt lnpucs Аг Domestiг Ргiсея 9.1 25.7 44.7 182.5 1,179.0 152,772.в 170.в66.4 32.3 46.3 At И[егпаnопаl Pnces 18.2 39.ь 58.9 209.7 2,ОВВ.в 284.199.7 231,в21.3 36.9 45.8 5. EPR �4Э.5% -35.1% �24.2% �13.0% -4Э.5% �46.2% -28.3% -12.5% 1.1% а. From 1985-1991, the ofiicial сиггепсу was the au9trale. Effective 1i1/92, it wa8 the peso argentino. The prices in 1оса1 сиггепсу геропед here reflect the differences in exchanpe rate. Sоигсе: Suiveillапсе Pioject, LATAD, 1995 TABLE А-8с STANDARIZED FORMAT PRODUCER SUB5IDY EQUIVAIENT Counvy. Araentna lурв� ЕарогtвDlв Г.оптадгlу: Whв1 lвrd. Fвт lяао 1яв1 lява lяяз lяяв lяев lявв lяят lяяя lяея lяяо tяяl lяяz lяяз Muket Vdue of Оисри[ OurPut 1lhоисмдв ot 1mr1 1Э.в00 8.700 9.000 9.500 9,000 10.000 11.0Э9 9.115 9.bB5 РгКе Рег 1оп 111 19 1в вЭ Э40 2.Э9в 2вв.911 52я.757 77 8в 1огв1 Mskeг VeMre о1 Qrrprr 1Ма1огв) 0 0 О 0 0 258 101 751 Э,22В 21,5в5 2,вв9,l07 S,ВЭв.952 715 8Эв Аввиипсе (Mdliorul: Уьkвг Ргсв SиРРиг 1В21 (106) (6в1 (во1 (7.5)в1 (1,2Э1.в001 (Э89.514) 1151 2В м.k.ггпа впье е 1z зв 1еэ з.з71 s3,eo5 11е,2ео о о 1�г роу�гк 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Gвдп Ак.гиw 0 0 0 0 0 0 О 0 0 Reкrch i Евглпsгоп Э 5 11 70 1,75в 13,095 102,57в 19 22 ToW Мдвtикв 0 0 0 0 0 (71) 1вя1 (1)1 192 (2.151) 11.17�.9001 (170.в581 • 1я Ргодисег вгЬвiду fquvвknt �27.5% -22.1% �2.Э% 6.0% -11.4% �Э9.в% �2 9% 0.в% 5 7% 1. iraп !!дб / 991, рвiсва ырnаsвд ir Ivtбdra рв� МТ. А/1w 19! 1, r1 рвАеа в/lв�prr вN А/Г. I. Р5Е вsаммв Io пы жА�дв вц��авгв о/ ди A/йisby e/ MieWiьrв. Distributors of World Bank Publications ARGENTINA DENMARK JAPAN SINGAPORE, TAIWAN Carlos Hirsch, SRL SamfundsLitteratur Eastern Book Service Gower Asia Pacific Pte Ltd. Galeria Guemes Rosenoerns All' 11 Hongo 3-Chome, Bunkyo-ku 113 Golden Wheel Building Florida 165, 4th Floor-Ofc. 453/465 DK-1970 Frederiksberg C Tokyo 41, Kailang Pudding, #0"3 1333 Buenos Aires Singapore 1334 EGYPT, ARAB REPUBLIC OF KENYA Oficina del Libro Internacional Al Ahram Africa Book Service (E.A.) Ltd SLOVAK REPUBLIC Alberti 40 Al Galaa Street Quaran House, Mfangano St. Slovart G.T.G. Ltd. 1082 Buenos Aires Cairo P.O. Box 45245 Krupinska 4 Nairobi P.O. Box 152 AUSTRALIA, PAPUA NEW GUINEA, The Nliddle East Observer 852 99 Bratislava 5 FIJI, SOLOMON ISLANDS, 41, Sherif Street KOREA, REPUBLIC OF VANUATU, AND Cairo Daejon Trading Co. Ltd. SOUTH AFRICA, BOTSWANA WESTERN SAMOA P.O. Box 34 Oxford University Press D.A. Information Services FINLAND Yeoeida SouthernAfrica 648 WWtehorse Road Akateeminen Kirjakauppa Seoul P.O. Box 1141 Mitcham 3132 P.O. Box 23 Cape Town 8000 Victoria FIN-00371 Helsinki MALAYSIA University of Malaya Cooperative SPAIN AUSTRIA FRANCE Bookshop, Limited Mundi-Prensa Libros, S.A. Gerold and Co. World Bank Publications P.O. Box 1127, Jalan Pantai Baru Castello 37 Graben 31 66, avenue d'I,na 59700 Kuala Lumpur 28001 Madrid A-1011 Wien 75116 Paris MEXICO LibTeria lntemacional AEDOS BANGLADESH GERMANY INFOTEC Consell. de Cent, 391 Nlicro Industries Development UNO-Verlag Apartado Postal 22-860 08009 Barcelona Assistance Society (MIDAS) Poppelsdorfer ALIee 55 14060TIalpan, Mexico D.F. House 5, Road 16 53115 Bonn SRI LANKA & THE MALDIVES Dharuriondi R/ Area NETHERLANDS Lake House Bookshop Dhaka 1209 GREECE De Lindeboom/InOr-Publikaties RO Box 244 Papasotiriou S.A. RO Box 202 100, Sir Chittampalam A. BELGIUM 35, StOUMara SIT. 7480 AE Haaksbergen Gardiner Mawatha jean De Lannoy 106 82 Athens Colombo 2 Av. du Roi 202 NEW ZEALAND 1060 Brussels HONG KONG, MACAO EBSCO NZ Ltd. SWEDEN Asia 2000 Ltd. Private Mail Bag 99914 Fritzes Customer Service BRAZIL 46-48 Wyndham Street New Market Regeringsgatan 12 Publicacoes Tecnicas Intemacionais Wirming Centre Auckland S-106 47 Stockholm Ltda. 7th Floor Rua Peixoto Gomide, 209 Central, Hong Kong NIGERIA Wermergren-Wilhams AB 01409 Sao Paulo, SP University Press Limited P 0. Box 1305 HUNGARY Three Crowns Building Jericho S-171 25 Solna CANADA Foundation for Market Economv Private Mail Bag 5095 Le Diffuseur Dombovari Ut 17-19 fbaclan SWITZERLAND 151A Boul. de Mortagne H-1117 Budapest Libraine Pavot Boucherville, Qu6bec NORWAY Case postale 3212 J413 5E6 INDIA Narvesen triformation Center CH 1002 I-Ausanne Allied Publishers Private Ltd. Book Department Renouf Publishing Co. 751 Mount Road P.O. Box 6125 Etterstad Van Diermen Editions Techniques 1294 Algoma Road Madras - 600 002 N-0602 Oslo 6 P.O. Box 465 Ottawa, Ontario KlB 3W8 CH 1211 Geneva 19 INDONESIA PAKISTAN CHINA Pt. Indira Limited Mirza Book Agency TANZANIA China Financial & Economic Jalan BoTobuclur 20 65, Shahrah-e-Quaid-e-Azam Oxford University Press Publishing House P.O. Box 181 P.O. Box No. 729 Maktaba Street 8, Da Fo Si Dong Jie Jakarta 10320 Lahore 54000 P.O. Box 5299 Beijing IRAN Oxford University Press Dar es,Salaam COLOMBIA Kowkab Publishers 5 Bangalore Town THAILAND Infoenlace Ltda. P.O. Box 19575-511 Sharae Faisal Central Books Distribution Co. Ltd. Apartado Aereo 34270 Tehran P.O. Box 13033 306 Silom Road Bogota D.E. Karachi-75350 Bangkok IRELAND COSTA RICA, BELIZE, GUATE Government Supplies Agency PERU TRINIDAD& TOBAGO, JAMAICA -MALA, HONDURAS, 4-5 Harcourt Road Editorial Desarrollo SA Svstematics Studies Unit NICARAGUA, PANAMA Dublin 2 Apartado 3824 #9 Watts Street Chispas Bookstore Lima I Curepe 75 Meters al Norte del Hotel Balmoral ISRAEL Trinidad, West Indies en calle 7 Yozmot Literature Ltd. PHILIPPINES San Jose P.O. Box 56055 International Book Center UGANDA Tel Aviv 61560 Suite 720, Citvland 10 Gustro Ltd. COTE D'IVOIRE Condominium Tower 2 Ist Floor, Room 4, Geogiadis Chambers Centre d'Eclition et de Diffusion R.O.Y. International Ayala Avenue, H.V. dela P 0. Box 9997 Afficaines (CEDA) P.O. Box 13056 . Costa Extension Plot (69) Kampala Road 04 B.P. 541 Tel Aviv 61130 Makati, Metro Manila Kampala Abidjan G4 Plateau Palestinian AuthorihIMiddh, East POLAND UNITED KINGDOM CYPRUS Index Information Services International Publishing Service Microinfo Ltd. Center of Applied Research P.O B. 19502 Jerusalem Ul. Piekna 31/37 P 0. Box 3 Cyprus College 00-577 Warszawa Alton, Hampshire GU34 2PG 6, Diogenes Street, Engonu ITALY England P 0. Box 2006 Licosd Commissionaria Sansoni SPA PORTUGAL Nicosia Via Duca Di Calabria, 1/1 Livraria Portugal ZAMBIA Casella Postale 552 Rua Do Cdrnio 70-74 University Bookshop CZECH REPUBLIC 50125 Firenze 1200 Lisbon GreAt East Road Campus National Information Center P.O. Box 32379 P.O. Box 668 JAMAICA SAUDI ARABIA, QATAR Lusaka CS-113 57 Prague I Ian Randle Publishers Ltd. Jarir Book Store 206 Old Hope Road P.O Box 3196 ZIMBABWE Kingston 6 Riyadh 11471 Longman Zimbabwe (Pte.) Ltd. Tourle Road, Ardberutie P.O. Box ST 125 RECENT WORLD BANK TECHNICAL PAPERS (continued) No. 254 Frischtak, Governance Capacity and Economic Reform in Developing Countries No. 255 Mohan, editor, Bibliography of Publications: Technical Department, Africa Region, July 1987 to April 1994 No. 256 Campbell, Design and Operation of Smallholder Irrigation in South Asia No. 257 Malhotra, Sinsukprasert, and Eglington, The Performance of Asia's Energy Sector No. 258 De Geyndt, Managing the Quality of Health Care in Developing Countries No. 259 Chaudry, Reid, and Malik, editors, Civil Service Reform in Latin America and the Caribbean: Proceedings of a Conference No. 260 Humphrey, Payment Systems: Principles, Practice, and Improvements No. 261 Lynch, Provision for Children with Special Educational Needs in the Asia Region No. 262 Lee and Bobadilla, Health Statistics for the Americas No. 263 Le Moigne, Subramanian, Xie, and Giltner, editors, A Guide to the Formulation of Water Resources Strategy No. 264 Miller and Jones, Organic and Compost-Based Growing Media for Tree Seedling Nurseries No. 265 Viswanath, Building Partnerships for Poverty Reduction: The Participatory Project Planning Approach of the Women's Enterprise Management Training Outreach Program (WEMTOP) No. 266 Hill and Bender, Developing the Regulatory Environment for Competitive Agricultural Markets No. 267 Vald6s and Schaeffer, Surveillance of Agricultural Prices and Trade: A Handbook for the Dominican Republic No. 268 Vald6s and Schaeffer, Surveillance of Agricultural Prices and Trade: A Handbook for Colombia No. 269 Scheierling, Overcoming Agricultural Pollution of Water: The Challenge of Integrating Agricultural and Environmental Policies in the European Union No. 270 Banerjee, Rehabilitation of Degraded Forests in Asia No. 271 Ahmed, Technological Development and Pollution Abatement: A Study of How Enterprises Are Finding Alternatives to Chlorofluorocarbons No. 272 Greaney and Kellaghan, Equity Issues in Public Examinations in Developing Countries No. 273 Grimshaw and Helfer, editors, Vetiver Grass for Soil and Water Conservation, Land Rehabilitation, and Embankment Stabilization: A Collection of Papers and Newsletters Compiled by the Vetiver Network No. 274 Govindaraj, Murray, and Chellaraj, Health Expenditures in Latin America No. 275 Heggie, Management and Financing of Roads: An Agenda for Reform No. 276 Johnson, Quality Review Schemes for Auditors: Their Potential for Sub-Saharan Africa No. 277 Convery, Applying Environmental Economics in Africa No. 278 Wijetilleke and Karunaratne, Air Quality Management: Considerations for Developing Countries No. 279 Anderson and Ahmed, The Case for Solar Energy Investments No. 280 Rowat, Malik, and Dakolias, Judicial Reform in Latin America and the Caribbean: Proceedings of a World Bank Conference No. 281 Shen and Contreras-Hermosilla, Environmental and Economic Issues in Forestry: Selected Case Studies in India No. 282 Kim and Benton, Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Onchocerciasis Control Program (OCP) No. 283 Jacobsen, Scobie and Duncan, Statutory Intervention in Agricultural Marketing: A New Zealand Perspective No. 284 Vald6s and Schaeffer in collaboration with Roldos and Chiara, Surveillance of Agricultural Price and Trade Policies: A Handbook for Uruguay No. 285 Brehm and Castro, The Market for Water Rights in Chile: Major Issues No. 286 Tavoulareas and Charpentier Clean Coal Technologies for Developing Countries No. 287 Gillham, Bell, Arin, Matthews, Rumeur, and Hearn, Cotton Production Prospects for the Next Decade No. 289 Dinar, Seidl, Olem, Jorden, Duda, and Johnson, Restoring and Protecting the World's Lakes and Reservoirs No. 290 Weijenberg, Dagg, Kampen Kalunda, Mailu, Ketema, Navarro, and Abdi Noor, Strengthening National Agricultual Research Systems in Eastern and Central Africa: A Framework for Action No. 291 Vald6s and Schaeffer, Surveillance of Agricultural Price and Trade Policies: A Handbook for Chile No. 292 Gorriz, Subramanian, and Simas, Irrigation Management Transfer in Mexico: Process and Progress THE WORLD BANK ~ A partner in strengthening economies and expanding markets to improve the quality of life for people everywhere, especially the poorest Headquarters European Office Tokyo Office 1818 H Street, N.W. 66, avenue d'I6na Kokusai Building Washington, D.C. 20433, U.S.A. 75116 Paris, France 1-1, Marunouchi 3-chome Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100, Japan Telephone: (202) 477-1234 Telephone: (1) 40.69.30.00 Facsimile: (202) 477-6391 Facsimile: (1) 40.69.30.66 Telephone: (3) 3214-5001 Telex: MCI 64145 WORLDBANK Telex: 640651 Facsimile: (3) 3214-3657 Mci 248423 WORLDBANK Telex: 26838 Cable Address: INTBAFRAD WASHINGTONDC World Wide Web: http://www.worldbank.org E-mail: books@worldbank.org 13 3 I 0 111313 9 780821 333334 ISBN 0-8213-3333-X