|
on Confederation of Independent States |
|
Issue of 2016‒12‒11
six papers chosen by |
| By: | Janzen, Joseph P.; Adjemian, Michael K. |
| Abstract: | The United States may be losing its leadership role in the world wheat market. Rising trading volume in foreign futures markets and shifting shares of world trade are suggested as evidence of this shift, but neither necessitates that futures markets in the United States are any less important for wheat price discovery. This paper applies market microstructure methods including the Yan and Zivot (2010) information leadership share to estimate the proportion of price discovery occurring in wheat futures markets in Chicago, Minneapolis, and Paris. We find that United States markets still dominate wheat price discovery, although the share of price discovery for the Paris market jumped noticeably in 2010 coinciding with major supply shocks in Russia and Ukraine. |
| Keywords: | wheat, price discovery, futures, market microstructure, information share, Agribusiness, Agricultural Finance, Crop Production/Industries, International Relations/Trade, Q11, G13, |
| Date: | 2016–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ags:assa17:250112&r=cis |
| By: | Kulyk, Iryna; Herzfeld, Thomas |
| Abstract: | According to prospects of international organisations like OECD and FAO, Ukraine will be one of the important suppliers of agricultural products on the world market in the coming decade. Thus, Ukrainian agricultural production and exports are important elements in sustaining global food security. However, the country threatens global food security as well as its own agricultural development when applying grain export restrictions, as happened several times in recent years. Therefore, any impediments to grain trade in the country should be carefully inspected. In this paper we analyse recent developments of Ukrainian agricultural policy influencing grain trade. We show that any export restriction brings large welfare losses compared to a free trade situation. We support our claim by a comparative analysis of the different export policies applied by the Ukrainian government on the domestic wheat market between 2006 and 2014. Additionally, we suggest and discuss alternative policy responses to realise the policy goal of domestic food security. As the policies applied, export tax, export quota and tax reimbursement, cannot be compared directly we quantify the tax equivalent of each trade policy measure. Under a set of specific assumptions the tax equivalent can be used to compare the effects of policies theoretically and empirically. Our findings go along with theory and show that export quotas in 2006 and in 2010 had a more restrictive effect on export than export taxes in 2011. Effects of non-reimbursement of VAT are very close to the effects of export tax in 2011 (at the level of 9%), mainly because most of the time these two measures were implemented simultaneously. We also calculated tariff equivalent of VAT non-reimbursement excluding the period of export taxes. Based on these results, the measure corresponds to a slight decline of the tariff equivalent in absolute terms. As an alternative policy option for the Ukrainian government to respond more efficiently to increasing world market prices in the future it is advised to use consumer-oriented measures for the most vulnerable groups of people instead of distorting market mechanisms. |
| Keywords: | export restrictions, non-tariff barriers, Ukraine, wheat trade, Agribusiness, |
| Date: | 2015–05 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ags:eaa144:206218&r=cis |
| By: | Tomila V. Lankina |
| JEL: | L91 L96 |
| Date: | 2016–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ehl:lserod:68473&r=cis |
| By: | Giuliano Contento de Oliveira; Paulo José Whitaker Wolf |
| Abstract: | Ao longo das últimas décadas, Brasil, Rússia, Índia e China (BRIC) assumiram um papel relevante no âmbito nas relações internacionais, particularmente no que se refere à realização de investimentos estrangeiros diretos (IEDs). Esse grupo de economias, ainda que sob diferentes intensidades, deixou de ser mero receptor de IED para se tornar importante originador dessa modalidade de investimento. Nesse sentido, este trabalho tem o objetivo de explorar a dinâmica do IED realizado pelos BRICs, de sorte a capturar seus principais fatores condicionantes, o seu comportamento, a sua estrutura e os principais destinos ao longo do período 1995-2013. Pôde-se verificar o protagonismo do IED chinês nesse processo, embora os demais países que compõem o grupo tenham aumentado de maneira importante os seus respectivos estoques de IED entre o início e o fim do intervalo considerado. Diferenças também importantes foram verificadas no que diz respeito aos principais fatores condicionantes desses investimentos realizados pelos BRICs, assim como à estrutura e aos destinos mais importantes. Além disso, depois da deflagração da crise global em 2008, essas diferenças se tornaram ainda mais evidentes. O estudo realizado permite concluir, pois, que o êxito desse processo requer iniciativas destinadas a assegurar que as empresas desses países sejam capazes de competir nas mesmas condições que as dos países desenvolvidos em setores estratégicos. Over the past decades, Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRICs) have assumed an important role in international relations, in particular with regard to the foreign direct investment (FDI). This group of economies, albeit under different intensities, ceased to be mere recipients of FDI to become important source of this kind investment. Thus, this study aims to explore the dynamics of the FDI of the BRICs, in order to capture its main conditioning factors, their trajectory, their structure and their major destinations throughout the period 1995-2013. It was verified the Chinese FDI leadership in this process, although the other countries that compose the group have increased in a significant way their respective FDI stocks between the beginning and the end of the considered period. In addition, significant differences were verified with regard to the main determining factors of these investments of BRICs, as well as to its structure and to its most important destinations. Moreover, after the outbreak of the global crisis in 2008 these differences have become even more evident. This study allows concluding, therefore, that the success of this process requires initiatives to ensure that companies in those countries are able to compete on the same conditions as those of the developed countries in strategic sectors. |
| Date: | 2016–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ipe:ipetds:2242&r=cis |
| By: | Arnade, Carlos; Hoffman, Linwood |
| Abstract: | In this study we examine changing relationships among maize prices in four global markets. In doing so, we allow the quantity of exports to play a role in both price transmission and price response. That is, we adapt threshold cointegration methods to search for critical export volumes that enhance (or diminish) the role a region’s price plays in the world market. We find that the short run response of prices in both Argentina and Ukraine is influenced by the level of Ukraine’s exports. However the period where Ukraine’s exports reached their threshold coincides with the period that Argentina imposed export restrictions on maize. We also find that there are numerous country specific price thresholds that influence each market’s short run response to a price shock. |
| Keywords: | Crop Production/Industries, International Relations/Trade, |
| Date: | 2016–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ags:assa17:250116&r=cis |
| By: | Andrea de Panizza (Italian National Institute of Statistics (ISTAT)); Ibrahim Rohman Kholilul |
| Abstract: | The PREDICT 2016 EU benchmarking factsheets present essential statistical data regarding the performance of the EU ICT sector in EU and 12 non-EU countries: Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, India, Japan, Korea, Norway, Russia, Switzerland, Taiwan, and the United States. The data is presented in terms of Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) to allow comparability. |
| Keywords: | R&D, ICT, Digital Economy, Information Society, Official Statistics, Industrial Transformation, Innovation. |
| JEL: | L63 L86 L96 O32 O33 |
| Date: | 2016–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ipt:iptwpa:jrc102366&r=cis |