The role of transparency in avoiding a COVID-19 induced food crisis

 Transparency reduces market uncertainty

In agricultural and food markets, information on both market conditions and policy developments is crucial to obtain a complete overview of the market situation. Market information on supply and demand balances, prices, and trade and stock volumes needs to be complemented by information on agricultural domestic and trade policies to form a complete picture of the current situation and to anticipate how markets might evolve in the short and medium term.

Consistently publishing this type of information increases transparency and reduces market uncertainty, thereby lowering the risk of people and governments taking damaging decisions based on incomplete information. Conversely, poor access to information can lead to counterproductive decisions with detrimental impacts on people and markets. A striking example related to staple crops is the surge in rice prices during the 2007-08 food price crisis. At that time, even though rice supplies were abundant, people, firms and governments started to stock up on rice because they had witnessed soaring wheat and maize prices in the face of shortages due to poor harvests and assumed there would be rice shortages as well. As a result, rice prices started to increase. In response, several large rice exporting countries then implemented export restrictions, thereby effectively reducing supply in the global market and causing the international price of rice to rise significantly, affecting the food security of millions of people around the world for whom rice is a key staple. Had timely, trusted information on the extent of rice stocks and production been available and widely communicated, panic, hoarding and export restrictions and the highly damaging price spikes they caused all could have been avoided.

In the initial period following the global spread of the COVID-19 outbreak, there were multiple reports of panic-buying and hoarding behaviour by consumers, particularly in the first few weeks when lockdowns were announced and implemented. Staple foods, such as wheat-based pasta or rice, were popularly hoarded products because of their long shelf life and because people were anticipating shortages. To halt panic buying and prevent the creation of artificial shortages, some countries started publishing regular reports on supply and demand balances,1 and several countries with public stocks of grains announced the levels of grains stored to reassure their citizens that there was sufficient availability to meet domestic demand. Some of those countries (e.g. India, Indonesia, Nigeria, Russian Federation (hereafter “Russia”), and Ukraine) also began to distribute food staples from their public stocks to prevent panic buying that could lead to artificial shortages and price increases (Table 1).

At the international level, AMIS has been regularly publishing information on market and policy developments. Furthermore, all the international organisations that make up the AMIS Secretariat, along with member countries, have been communicating consistent messages on the state of global markets for staples in the context of COVID-19. A key message has been that the global situation for staple crops is very different now compared to the food price crisis of 2007-08. Whereas the situation in 2007-08 was characterised by poor harvests in several key producers, low cereal stocks, a rising oil price, export restrictions, and the depreciation of the US Dollar, the current situation for AMIS crops is much more favourable. Ample global cereal stocks, low energy prices, and good production prospects mean that prices are much lower now than during the food price crisis (Figure 1) and stocks and production levels are both well above what they were in 2007-08 (Figure 2) and are even close to or at record levels for wheat, maize and rice.

 

Figure 1. Maize, rice, soybeans and wheat price indices (daily)

3 January 2005 to 16 September 2020 (Jan 2000 = 100)

Source: International Grains Council (IGC).

 

Figure 2. Production, stocks and utilisation of maize, rice, soybeans and wheat

2005-2019/20

Source: Agricultural Market Information System (AMIS).

 Transparency exposes bottlenecks and highlights risks

The COVID-19 outbreak hit the agriculture and food sector on all fronts: production, consumption, supply chains, and trade. Policy makers have required rapid access to accurate and timely information in order to triage problems and ensure that efforts and policies are directed to priority areas.

Understanding how market conditions have changed over time helps policy makers have a perspective in which to assess risks and identify bottlenecks. During crises, it is crucial to establish the extent to which the market situation is deviating from pre-existing trends and how the emerging situation compares to that in the lead-up to, or during, previous crises. This can only be achieved if market indicators and policy decisions have been consistently monitored and the information consistently reported. Obtaining a full picture of the situation also requires the ability to compare information across commodities and combine different types of information (e.g. market and policy information).

In the case of staple crops in the face of COVID-19, investments in transparency meant that information was readily available that quickly revealed that the problem in the market was not related to supply (given the abundance of stocks and favourable production outlooks) but was rather due to sudden demand surges driven by concerns about COVID-19, and to disruptions in trade and transport. Moreover, it showed that, in comparison to other commodities, staple crops were relatively less affected by transportation disruptions; this is because staples are often shipped in bulk, which requires less human interaction in ports, at border posts and on vessels. That said, these commodities were still affected by border procedures and quarantine measures that seriously affected trade, both domestically and internationally (OECD, 2020a).

Comparison of the global situation for different staple crops also revealed that, while global wheat, maize and soybean markets were stable, the rice market needed to be monitored more closely. In early March, international prices for rice started to increase following surges in demand. In April, the FAO’s all rice price index reached its highest level since December 2011, although this was still well below 2007-08 levels (FAO, 2020). One of the main contributing factors to this price increase was the suspension of new export contracts in Viet Nam, the world’s third largest rice exporter, as well as in Myanmar, combined with an export ban of rice by Cambodia. Additionally, the national lockdown in India, the world’s largest rice exporter, and quarantine measures in Pakistan had resulted in logistical constraints, which also increased uncertainty and pushed prices upwards. However, most export restrictions were removed by May 2020. Transparency about domestic and global market conditions, combined with transparency in policy decisions, prevented the situation from escalating and leading to wider adoption of export restrictions by other countries.

During the COVID-19 outbreak, export restrictions have once again become a popular tool for governments attempting to protect domestic markets – even though these measures are rarely effective and multiple studies have shown the detrimental effects of these policies on domestic and international markets (Anderson et al., 2013). Experience with the impact of export restrictions imposed during the 2007/08 crisis shows that by diverting supplies from world markets, such measures increased food prices and volatility, thereby harming all countries, but in particular countries dependent on food imports. During the COVID-19 outbreak, export restrictions were not limited to the agriculture sector, but were also imposed on other goods such as medical supplies and face masks (OECD 2020b, 2020c).

A number of countries implemented export bans and quotas on staple crops in response to the COVID-19 outbreak (Figure 3).2 However, information on the prevalence and duration of these policy measures needs to be combined with market information in order for their true impact on world markets to be understood. For example, Russia, the world’s largest wheat exporter, introduced a grain export quota for the period April-June, 2020. However, by 26 April, the quota had been filled, which implicitly meant that all grain exports from Russia were de facto suspended until 1 July. Likewise, India is not represented in Figure 3 because it has not explicitly banned exports; instead, exports have been halted because its lockdown severely curtailed shipments. By contrast, Ukraine introduced a wheat export quota in April-June, 2020 to avoid a rise in domestic bread prices, but the actual amount of wheat exports from the Ukraine remained at levels similar to those of the previous year.

Obviously, a small exporting country introducing an export restriction will not, by itself, influence international markets. However, the risk is that when one country introduces a restriction, other countries follow suit and the accumulation of export restrictions does indeed affect international markets. It is therefore important to continue monitoring all export restrictions being imposed by any country as they can quickly destabilize markets. Even if such restrictions are only implemented for a short time, their impacts can be significant and affect markets for a long period (Deuss, 2017).

 

Figure 3. Export restrictions imposed on staple crops in response to the Covid-19 outbreak

Note: *Indicates measures with no known end date.

Source: OECD compilation.

Even though some countries introduced export restrictions on staple crops in response to the COVID-19 outbreak, transparency about global market conditions prevented a situation where even more countries introduced these measures. Furthermore, transparency about policy measures gave trading partners a better understanding of potential bottlenecks in the supply chain and, by combining this policy information with market information, they were able to adjust accordingly. Increased transparency has also exerted pressure on countries to limit their use of policies that can have detrimental impacts domestically, but also on global markets. As a result, relatively fewer export restrictions were introduced than expected and most of these measures were short-lived.

 Clarity and comparability are essential

For policy makers and market participants to be able to fully take advantage of information, it should be presented in a way that is clear and easy to understand. For certain types of information, tables or graphs can be sufficient, but for more complex information, additional explanations may be required. Policy information is, by definition, more qualitative and therefore usually falls under the latter category (see also above on export restrictions).

Information on the agricultural and food sector is often collected or published by different institutions, which can make it challenging to compare data across sources within a country, as well as across countries. The AMIS initiative introduced several ways to deal with this issue. First, the different AMIS member countries collaborate with the Secretariat to harmonise market information (e.g. explaining assumptions behind the forecasts, use of the marketing year). Second, AMIS publishes global figures on the market situation by different sources3 side-by-side to offer users a credible range for the estimates. Third, consistent communication about the data is key. Several meetings and webinars have been organised by the AMIS members where market and policy information could be shared, discussed and validated. This not only helped to ensure trust in the information, but also helped to ensure the consistent communication from AMIS members that is important for reducing market uncertainty.

 Increasing the frequency of monitoring and reporting supports informed decision-making

Access to frequently updated information is crucial for people to make well-informed decisions. Making investment, planting, trade or policy decisions based on outdated information can have ripple effects that last for a long time. During extreme situations such as the COVID-19 outbreak, economies and market conditions change quickly, underscoring the need to have timely access to up-to-date information to inform decision-making. As soon as market conditions change or new policies are implemented, information needs to be made available so that stakeholders and governments can respond accordingly. Digital technologies have facilitated and simplified the rapid dissemination of information through online reports and video conferences (webinars) among multiple stakeholders. Yet information first must be collected, examined and verified before it can be published, and this can take time.

In agricultural markets, well-established structures are already in place for certain types of information gathering (e.g. price developments), which enables the frequency of reporting to be intensified as needed. However, not all information gathering can be accelerated. For instance, on-field monitoring requires people to inspect crops, which has been complicated during COVID-19 due to movement restrictions (Geoglam, 2020). In addition, certain types of information were not collected prior to the COVID-19 outbreak simply because this type of event had not occurred before (e.g. impacts of lockdown-induced restrictions on movements in the sector). Governments and international organisations needed time to establish the trusted, standardised systems to collect and publish this information.

At the international level, AMIS publishes monthly market and policy information on staple crops in its Market Monitor, but some of the AMIS organisations (e.g. the International Grains Council (IGC)) also publish daily updates for their members. As noted above, during COVID-19 several countries adopted this practice and also increased their reporting on supply and demand balances to stop panic buying. Multiple international organisations also started reporting on new policy developments as they were announced, thereby providing a global picture of countries’ policies in real time.4 In some cases, policies in global markets were changing multiple times per day: Table 2 illustrates how the export policy decisions of two large exporting countries changed multiple times over a matter of weeks. In periods of emergency such as the COVID-19 pandemic, where the situation can change rapidly, publishing this information as soon as it becomes available is crucial for domestic and international markets to adapt