An Economic Study of Small Pigholders in Vietnam: Some Insights Gained and the Scope for Further Research
Some relevant background to this research project is provided by outlining selected features of Vietnam’s pig industry. Then the main findings (in the view of the author) from this ACIAR-funded research are presented. These results include (1) natural protection given to Vietnam’s pig producers from imports as a result of the nature of the preferences of Vietnamese consumers: (2) the importance of household labour, especially that provided by females, in the husbandry of pigs held by households; (3) the existence, or otherwise, of scale economies as a function of the number of pigs held by households, (4) the import dependence for pig food of Vietnam’s pig industry and the way in which it varies with the number of pigs kept by households; (5) specialization in pig production, (6) regional differences in the economics of pig production; (7) economic discrimination in the supply of inputs to household producers of pigs and in their sale of pigs; (8) the size of pig-holdings and the use of professional services, such as veterinary services and extension services; and (9) findings about miscellaneous matters, such as the genetic composition of the pig stock. Scope for future research in relation to these aspects is also highlighted, and the need is raised for considering the economics of increasing quality standards and certifying the quality of pork. The economics of increasing the scale of pig producing units is given particular attention.
Natural protection from international competition in the livestock industry: Analysis, examples and Vietnam’s pork market as a case
In some countries, local agricultural products (particularly livestock products) are shielded from international competition by ‘natural’ factors influencing the purchase of products. These factors include strong local tastes (or preferences) that favour the local product and the absence (or relative absence) of complementary retail outlets or home appliances suitable for storing and preparing potential imported substitutes. The desire for fresh meat rather than chilled or frozen meat, the absence or limited accessibility of supermarket outlets and limited refrigeration possibilities in homes can limit imports into developed countries of meat supplied by developed countries. From consumer’s perspectives these fresh or raw products are significantly different products from their frozen or processed alternatives, and so face different demand parameters. This product differentiation is nearly always ignored in trade models, which instead assume homogenous commodities. Where local fresh products make up over 90% of sales, such as pork in Vietnam, this unrecognized product differentiation can undermine model results, since raw or fresh products are generally untradeable. Examples of such limitations on trade are given for several developing countries, including some African nations. Religious consideration can also be a factor restricting international trade in livestock products and sometimes, government regulations on food imports reflect the tastes of local buyers, for example their demands for food purity and so on. Some simple economic analysis is provided of how local producers of livestock benefit from natural protection. Drawing on the results of recent research completed in Vietnam and other sources, factors that provide natural protection to Vietnam’s pork industry are identified, and particular attention is given to their implications for small-scale household pig producers compared to larger-scale commercial pig producers in Vietnam. It is noted that the current protection of Vietnam’s pig industry is not entirely based on preference for pork from local breeds of pigs but arises for other reasons. Some consideration is given to whether the natural protection of Vietnam’s pig industry will change in the future.
Complexity, Network-Decisions And Alternative Risk Premia: Some New Theories Of Structural Change And Portfolio Decisions.
Structural Change is the basis for many decisions such as government fiscal and monetary policies, government interventions, corporate-expenditure decisions, corporate strategic decisions, portfolio management decisions in finance; household allocation decisions, etc.. Structural change in industries and national economies is increasingly more difficult to detect partly because of the growth and dominance of Complex Systems and “Networks” in modern industries and economies – such Networks and Complex Systems include GVCs (global value chains), retail store networks; franchising networks; internet networks; services networks; credit-chains in industries; online social networks; etc.. The relationship between Complexity and Structural Change is well established in the physics, applied math and economic dynamics literatures. Traditional definitions and modeling of structural change have erroneously focused on changes in labor, technological progress, market share, and or capital – which are grossly inadequate in the new economy and post- global financial crisis (as confirmed by changes in the global retailing and housing industries and other industries). Also the modeling of structural change seems to be constrained by the availability of data, and often omits the relationship between structural change on one hand, and globalization, financial stability and international financial contagion. This article: i) introduces the Operations Strategy Model of structural change, explains how it differs from the Lewis Model of Structural Change; and explains the often omitted relationship between operations strategy (of companies and government agencies) and structural change; ii) introduces other new Complexity-based models/theories of Structural Change in industries; iii) reviews the relationships among Operations Research, Complexity and Structural Change; iv) explains the symbiotic relationship between structural change on one hand, and economic growth, financial stability, financial contagion and globalization; v) discusses the significant gap between academic research and practice and explains some issues and factors that should be considered in the development and testing of structural change models; vi) explains how alternative risk premia can be generated from new models of Structural Change.