1 / 22

Market Diversification: Enhancing Export of Namibian Red Meat Products

Explore market diversification opportunities for Namibian red meat products using a decision support model. Results, conclusions, and implications outlined.

bronson
Download Presentation

Market Diversification: Enhancing Export of Namibian Red Meat Products

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Market Diversification Opportunities for Namibian Red Meat Products: Application of a Decision Support Model Ernst Idsardi, David Spies & Ermie Steenkamp 50th Annual AEASA Conference 1 – 3 October 2012, Bloemfontein, South Africa

  2. OUTLINE • Background • Approach: a Decision Support Model for identifying export opportunities • Results • Conclusions

  3. BACKGROUND • SETTING THE SCENE: • Namibian meat exports: boneless beef, carcasses of sheep, boneless meat of sheep • Small producer  niche products: grass-fed, organic • Disease status  exports of de-boned meat / limited exports from NCA • Export trends 2000 – 2011: • Beef exports +16% • Sheep meat exports + 413%

  4. BACKGROUND (2) • SETTING THE SCENE: • 65% of Namibian beef is exported • In 2011 58% of all cattle marketed was exported on the hoof to SA • In 2011, 86% of sheep marketed was slaughtered at local export abattoirs • Agriculture 4.1% of GDP  Livestock sector 2.2% of GDP  70% of population to an extend dependent on agric.

  5. BACKGROUND (3) • THE ISSUES: • Limited export market diversification Source: UN Comtrade

  6. BACKGROUND (4) • THE ISSUES: • Trade policy • Norway  preferential TRQ, although high NTB’s • European Union • Deadline for full EPA with EU by 2014?  termination of provisional application of IEPA  DFQF market access after 2014?  alternative trade regime (= GSP) does not cover meat products  MFN treatment (Tariff implication: frozen, boneless beef 92%)

  7. BACKGROUND (5) • THE OBJECTIVE: • Identification and selection of alternative export markets for Namibian red meat products • Excluding EU, Norway, South Africa • Agricultural development  diversification  new markets / existing products / new products

  8. APPROACH • Background: • Screening of potential export markets • International market identification and selection method • Quantitative approach  qualitative approach • Decision Support Model (DSM):Cuyvers (1996) for Belgium, Pearson et al. (2007), Steenkamp et al. (2009) for SA  adapted for Namibia

  9. APPROACH (2) • Framework of the DSM:

  10. APPROACH (3) • Scope: • All countries included, apart from EU countries, Norway and SA (data availability): 214 • Limitations: trade classification provides no detail on specific meat cuts (e.g. forequarters, fillet) or production practices (e.g. organic)

  11. APPROACH (4) • Filtering process of the DSM: Filter 1 • Filter 1.1 • Country risk scores for political and commercial risks (ONDD, Belgium) rated from 1 to 7 • Cut-off value calculated for filtering criteria • Filter 1.2 • GDP (current US$) • GDP per capita (current US$) • GDP growth • Cut-off value calculated for filtering criteria • Passes criteria if pass GDP and GDP per capita for two years • Elimination of 133 countries

  12. APPROACH (5) • Filtering process of the DSM: Filter 2 • Relative market size and -growth: • Per country/product combination: import statistics • HS 6-digit level • Imports as proxy for market size • Import growth in the short and long term • Cut-off values calculated to determine seven categories: • Country-product combination in categories 0 and 1 eliminated (6 countries)

  13. APPROACH (6) • Filtering process of the DSM: Filter 3 • Market accessibility index (no elimination)  weights

  14. APPROACH (7) • Filtering process of the DSM: Filter 4 • Final elimination: fresh meats  shipping time > 50 days • Ranking of realistic export opportunities  scoring: • Market accessibility: getting the product to the market • Market performance: is there a market?

  15. Results Export opportunities for Namibia per product

  16. Results (2)

  17. Results (3)

  18. Results (4) • Market accessibility: Singapore, Hong Kong • Market performance: Canada • Ranking: • Hong Kong (5) • Switzerland (3) (not “new”) • Qatar, Bahrain (2) • Singapore, Malaysia, China (1)

  19. Results (5) Top priority export opportunities per product  “low hanging fruits”

  20. Conclusions • So what? all products, all countries, risk, market dynamics, broad concept of market access  quantitative analysis • Several realistic export opportunities identified • DSM = first step of export strategy  capitalise opportunities • Financial attractiveness, consumer preferences  per meat cut • Entry strategy  role players, market structure • Alignment with supply potential  NCA, under-utilisation of local slaughter capacity, live exports to SA

  21. Conclusions (2) • Diversification strategy: • Namibia is a producer of niche not bulk products • “old” products  “low hanging fruits” • “new” products  cost/benefits of supply chain development? • Competitive edge: grass-fed, organic • Export opportunities for beef better than for sheep • Trade creation rather than diversion  SA is and will remain an important market, realisation of proposed changes in EU trade regime still unclear • Critical success factors: shipping times, supply, profitability

  22. Thank you for your attention!

More Related