Suchergebnisse

The number of recent publications on food loss and waste, and policy initiatives of governments and international organizations indicate the high priority of this topic. With this in mind, the methodology to measure food loss and waste has important implications for policy recommendations. The authors of this IAMO Policy Brief state that the many individual studies use different methodologies to quantify the size of waste with respect to metric measures and value for individual products and for the aggregate of food loss and waste. Most studies do not consider the costs incurred by reducing or redirecting food loss and waste. A recent publication has taken up the methodological problem (Bellamare et al.,2017). The authors of this IAMO Policy Brief investigate whether the proposed methodology solves the problem and can contribute to designing a rational policy to manage food loss and waste.

C 1-го февраля 2015 г. экспорт пшеницы из России облагается дополнительным налогом с целью сократить объемы вывозимой за рубеж продукции. Это предпринято в рамках противодействия высоким ценам на пшеницу на внутреннем рынке, а также для стабилизации цен на хлеб. Однако, недавний опыт в разных странах, включая Украину, Казахстан, Сербию, да и саму Россию, показывает, что ограничения на экспорт зерна оказывают лишь незначительное влияние или вовсе не влияют на цены на хлеб. Даже для бедных слоев населения такие меры государственного вмешательства не приносят ничего хорошего. Напротив, это отрезает российское зерновое хозяйство от международных рынков, снижается объем необходимых инвестиций в зерновой сектор, что противоречит положениям доктрины продовольственной безопасности. Такая форма государственного протекционизма не может не вызывать обеспокоенности. Ведь именно в условиях сегодняшнего падения российской экономики дестабилизация стратегически важного зернового сектора, безусловно, не способствует улучшению инвестиционного климата в России. ; Since 1 February 2015, an additional tax has been levied on Russian wheat exports to reduce the recently strongly rising wheat exports. The aim is to dampen further increases in the already high domestic wheat prices and to stabilise bread prices. However, recent experiences in various countries as Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Serbia, and Russia show that grain export restrictions do little if anything to moderate bread prices. Poor people will also fail to profit from this governmental market intervention. Instead, grain export barriers will disconnect the Russian grain producers from the international markets while necessary investments in the grain sector decline which decreases food security. This form of protectionism by the government is ample cause for serious concern. Considering the current downswing in the Russian economy, the destabilisation of the strategically important grain sector will most certainly not improve the investment climate in Russia.

21. Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.

The Russian government implemented a wheat export tax in February 2015 to reduce food inflationary pressures resulting from the rouble's dramatic devaluation. This article discusses the causes of the rouble's instability and volatility, and the effects of the export controls on domestic wheat and bread prices. Although such export taxes are appealing to governments due to their low financial costs, we show that their economic costs are substantial in the long run. We suggest desisting from such trade-oriented measures and instead helping consumers adapt to high food prices.

Es besteht eine erhebliche Gefahr, dass politisch verordnete Markteingriffe, die einem vermeintlichen Versagen der Märkte entgegenwirken sollen, Agrarmärkte nicht besser sondern schlechter funktionieren lassen. Dies gilt einmal mehr für osteuropäische Transformationsländer mit einem eingeschränkt funktionierenden institutionellen Regelwerk. Auf Basis der Ergebnisse verschiedener empirischer Untersuchungen zur Funktionstüchtigkeit osteuropäischer Getreide-, Milch- und Fleischmärkte plädiert der vorliegende Policy Brief nachdrücklich für eine Zurückhaltung mit agrarmarktregulierenden Maßnahmen. Es zeigt sich, dass diese mit hohen gesamtwirtschaftlichen Kosten verbunden sind und ihren populistisch motivierten Zielen sogar entgegenwirken können.

Substantial danger exists that politically prescribed market interventions, designed to counter a supposed failure of the markets, will leave markets functioning worse rather than better. This is particularly true of Eastern European transition countries, where institutional regulations function only to a limited extent. Based on the findings of a variety of empirical studies that examine how Eastern European grain, dairy and meat markets are functioning, this policy brief strongly advocates restraint in the introduction of measures to regulate agricultural markets. Such regulations have high macroeconomic costs and may work counter to their objectives, which are designed to have popular appeal.