Monday, February 21, 2011

Down Goes the Prophet of Jamahiriya

The first thing Muammar Gaddafi did after taking over as ruler of Libya over 40 years ago was to invent a word with which to name the new country: Jamahiriya.  It is based on the Arabic word meaning "state of the masses."  Apparently the state of the masses in Libya, er Jamahiriya, is... angry.  Again Al-Jazeera's coverage of the events is making Western media look foolish, as this time our "gatekeepers" are covering the 1,900 person royal wedding guest list (and speculating about Kate Middleton's gown!).

Here continues the series on the increase in food prices and its consequences.  It is worth noting that in his rambling, threatening communique on state television yesterday, Gaddafi's son perfectly described the economy of the country.  "How will you obtain flour," he asked, "when a civil war comes and the petrol is burned."  My previous post showed that Libya not only imports all of its wheat, but a large amount of wheat flour also.  The country has been so badly mismanaged that there is not even a viable milling industry.  Libya is the most extreme, but not nearly the only example of an absurd oil-for-food trade scheme that was destined for failure.  The rapid food price increase is the tipping point.

I am focusing on wheat in this series even though food price increases are being driven by the rise in all major food commodities except rice.  There are good reasons for this.  Wheat is mostly consumed by humans, and largely in the form of bread, in stark contrast to soybeans and corn, which are both increasingly used in transportation fuels and non-food products, and beef production.  When prices rise as fast as they have in the current period it makes sense to focus on the bare essentials.  This is not only practical; since bread can be stored and transported easily as the food of last resort, access to it is also psychological.  If a country cannot provide a steady and affordable supply of the absolute basics, is there any reason to leave its leaders in place?  We are seeing the answer to that question all across North Africa and the Middle East.

This first chart is the historic wheat price, not adjusted for dollar exchange trade value (that is coming), since 1981 (courtesy World Bank via Index Mundi).
In the chart below I used the historic wheat price and coded the peaks and troughs.  I then divided the negative or positive percent change by the number of months it took to get there.  As you can see from the chart above, the price for wheat in 2008 remains an all-time high.  But the price increase from it's trough in the current bull market has been more rapid.  This chart shows that in the current run-up, the average price increase per month is over 15%.
Many countries across the region had diminished wheat stocks at the end of last year, even though the US wheat stocks were three times larger than in 2007.  They must have believed that prices could not be sustained and were waiting for them to start declining in February (historically the beginning of the seasonal price down-trend).  These countries have recently been buying huge amounts of wheat at or above the current peak price.  At the end of last week the wheat price plummeted as traders noted that there simply were not any buyers.  So much for the "growth-led" exponential demand pressures and bad weather we keep hearing about.  It should be clearer by now, and will be by the end of this series, that wheat prices since the mid-90's have been driven by conditions in the equities, treasuries, and non-food commodity markets, not supply and demand fundamentals. 

We are in unchartered territory here.  When prices rise this fast, hoarding will take place and regimes will soon realize that their chances of remaining in power are better if they withhold food instead of giving it away.  The only prediction we can be confident about is that the increased volatility in the wheat markets since the mid-90's will continue.  As I will show, volatility, not price peaks is the root of the problem, and the culprit is obvious and identifiable.

Tuesday, February 8, 2011

Here Comes the Bad News

Today we'll look deeper at some numbers to understand why the current unrest in the Middle East and North Africa is food-based.  First, below are two maps from the FAO that present two important features of the food marketplace in the region.

The first titled "Dietary Energy Consumption" shows that per capita daily calorie intake in all of the countries in the region except Yemen is over 3,000.  That is on par with Australia and Spain, for example.  Egypt, specifically, is better off than the other countries in the neighborhood.  This makes sense if you look closer at the table of largest wheat importers from yesterday.  Third on the list was Egypt in dollar value, but in terms of total volume they are first.  They just get a really good per unit price on their wheat (I can't imagine how that happened).  In general, the people in these countries have enough to eat.  The situation is much different throughout the rest of Africa, India, and in parts of South America.
The next map entitled "Net Trade in Food" shows us the balance of food exports and imports divided by  consumption.  The dark green countries consume quite a bit, as the map above shows, but they are the production powerhouses that export huge amounts of food, especially staple commodities.  The orange areas in North Africa indicate a huge negative balance.  If we look at the map above again and recall that those countries have enough food to consume, the negative balance must mean that they are big food importers.  Egypt is better off than others in the region because they export a lot of high value fruit crops.
So we know that the countries in the region have plenty of access to food, but that they are highly reliant on imports to meet those needs.  Why does this matter?  Think about it this way.  Joe lives in a relatively modern country with plenty of access to food even though he is poor and spends a large percentage of his income on it.  Nancy lives in a developing country where food scarcity is common, she is also poor and spends a lot of her income on food.  In both countries wheat prices have led to significant disruption in food distribution and huge retail prices increases.  If you are a dictator, which country would you rather rule?  My answer: the country where technology does not make organizing protests really easy, and where people are accustomed to being hungry.

Below is a chart showing percentage expenditures on food in various countries, sorted by percent expenditure on cereals, like wheat and corn.  This is not a comprehensive list, rather representative countries that illustrate the trade imbalance in staple foods between Western countries and those in the subject region. 

First note the difference in percent food expenditures between countries like Egypt and Morocco, and Germany and Australia.  The yellow hi-lighted countries spend a relatively small percentage of expenditures on food, and we see that the types of food they import are items like wine and cheese, not staple foods.

This data was compiled by the USDA's Economic Research Service, and it is based on a 1996 survey.  I added to it the 2008 top three food imports from the FAO database, and the last column on the right is the percentage of wheat consumption that was produced in the subject country.  Those percentages only appear for countries where wheat was the number one import (also hi-lighted in green).  All of the green hi-lighted countries are in the subject region, wheat is their number one import, and they spend a large percentage of income on both cereals and all foods.  The countries with red hi-lighted text are those that spend over 1/3 of their income on food, and import over 1/2 of their wheat.

Turkey and Iran are very close to that threshold, and Spain and Italy should be on the watch list as all their numbers are creeping up, and they import a lot of soybeans and wheat, respectively.  They are also two of the Mediterranean countries having major financial problems.

All of the countries hi-lighted in green have experienced recent protests or revolutions sparked by sharp increases in food prices.  Algeria, with its very large wheat imports, could be next.  Even if countries subsidize bread and other basic foodstuffs, they can only maintain those emergency measures for so long.  What we saw last year was pure speculation, but what we'll see now will be actual hoarding.  Prices will continue to rise with scarcity, and unrest will continue.  Of course, most of the countries on this list also import large amounts of corn and soybeans.  The prices of those two commodities has risen sharply, but those increases began a few months after wheat.  Just wait until those increases begin to affect retail prices.

Policy makers can wring their hands about who will take over in these countries in the near term, but it won't matter.  Tunisia set off a food-based economic death spiral in the region that will not end with current leaders being deposed.  Anybody who wants to step forward and occupy the palace had better sleep with one eye open.

Monday, February 7, 2011

Suicide's Easy, What Happened to the Revolution?*

As talking heads debate the future political power structure of Egypt, one constant remains as it did before the crisis began (hint: it is not the Muslim Brotherhood).  As I have noted in this blog many times, the staple foods commodity markets are experiencing an artificial bubble (yes, I am disagreeing with Ben Bernanke) that will have serious consequences.

The most stark examples of this are the revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt.  But if this is an economic phenomenon, we need to ask some important questions.  First, what other countries are experiencing problems due to rapidly rising food prices?  Second, where are they?  Third, in the context of their broader economy, does it matter?  Fourth, what are the long-term implications?

In the series of maps and tables I present over the next several days, I will try to answer all of these questions.  Instead of putting myself in the position of arguing an obvious point with a trained economist who is probably a genius, I will present straightforward data from the UN Food & Agriculture Organization (FAO) which both shows how Tunisia and Egypt arrived at this place, and how several other countries in the region are likely to suffer the same fate.

First up, the most recent data (2008) for wheat imports.  Look who's 3rd.

RankAreaQuantity (tonnes)FlagValue (1000 $)FlagUnit value ($/tonne)
1Japan57807103291570569
2Algeria6913570R3055210R442
3Egypt8327790R2461720R296
4Italy54430402277540418
5Indonesia44971901975480439
6Brazil60327001873590311
7Iran (Islamic Republic of)5197370R1801340R347
8Morocco40835801609100394
9Turkey37080001483190400
10Spain46559801430390307
11Netherlands43045701389950323
12Republic of Korea26823101274360475
13Mexico32170301246900388
14Iraq2963320R1242860R419
15Belgium31145401151470370
16United States of America25165001080410429
17Yemen2126630956364450
18Philippines2251970R936905R416
19Germany2582770910089352
20Tunisia1762440811114460
FAO Stat Wheat Imports 2008

*Black Rebel Motorcycle Club
Song: Berlin
Album: Baby 81