Search

The objective of this article is to assess the competitiveness of the European food industry from an economic and legal perspective. Knowledge of its present competitiveness and improvement opportunities are lacking. To close this knowledge gap, we measured the competitiveness of eight subsectors, benchmarked them with four leading world economies, assessed the effect of differences in legal requirements, and predicted future developments using scenario analysis. International economics indicators supplemented with data on legal issues from a survey conducted by leading experts were used to measure competitiveness. The results show that the EU food industry's competitiveness is weak. The legal system was positively evaluated compared to the U.S. system, but major improvements are possible. The recommendations are to improve economies of scale, economies of scope, ICT-based supply chain management, and exploit cultural differences through innovation, within a more flexible and streamlined legal framework

This study assessed the competitiveness of the EU food industry benchmarked against USA, Australia, Brazil and Canada. This assessment is based on trade indicators (Relative Net trade advantage and export share on the world market) and on economic indicators (value added, labour productivity and share value added in total manufacturing). This study is an update of an earlier study executed in 2007. The overall competitiveness performance of the EU28 (intra-EU trade excluded) remained weak: the three economic indicators weakened and the trade indicators improved in period (2) 2008-2012 compared to period (1) 2003-2007. The position in period 2 was even weaker than the relative weak position in period 1. Brazil remained the strongest and the USA became strong. Deze studie beoordeelt de concurrentiepositie van de EU-levensmiddelenindustrie in vergelijking met die van de Verenigde Staten, Canada, Australië en Brazilië. Deze beoordeling is gebaseerd op handelsindicatoren (relatieve netto handelsvoordeel en exportaandelen op de wereldmarkt) en op economische indicatoren (toegevoegde waarde, arbeidsproductiviteit en aandeel toegevoegde waarde in de totale industriële productie). Deze studie is een actualisering van een eerdere studie uitgevoerd in 2007. De concurrentiepositie van de EU28 (exclusief de handel tussen lidstaten) bleef zwak: de drie economische indicatoren verzwakten en de handelsindicatoren verbeterden in periode 2 (2008-2012) in vergelijking met periode 1 (2003-2007). De relatieve positie in periode 2 was zelfs zwakker dan de relatief zwakke positie in periode 1. Brazilië bleef de sterkste en de Verenigde Staten werd sterker.

In recent years, supply chain performance measures have been in the spotlight of many authors. Many performance measures have been used. In this paper, efficiency was measured as an indicator of performance in the vegetable supply chain. The study consisted of two stages. In the first, data envelopment analysis (DEA) evaluated technical and scale efficiency of the Dutch vegetable sector relative to the type of final distribution (mixed marketing channels versus traditional auctions). In the second stage, a truncated regression model (TRM) was applied to explain grower efficiency from a managerial point of view. The results of the first stage showed that growers who sell their products through auctions are less efficient. The second stage revealed that variables such as firm size, age, ownership structure, and distribution channel strategy significantly contribute to the explanation of technical efficiency of the growers, while the variables firm location, firm size, and firm age affect their scale.

This paper presents an assessment of the competiveness performance of Swiss food industries. The approach taken here is to measure revealed performance, relying on indicators such as market performance, trade success and revealed comparative advantage indicators. The analysis of competitiveness examines the ex post performance of the industry in Switzerland compared to the same industry in benchmark countries in the European Union.

Recent price movements have put food supply chains under pressure. On the one side, upward price tendencies on commodity markets result in higher costs to processing firms. On the other side, these firms are confronted with a strong retail sector that is able to prevent compensation to protect consumers’ and own economic interests. Regulatory impediments of European law, especially with respect to foodstuffs, can adversely be utilized as barriers to protect the interest downstream the supply chain. The problem is that legal-economic instruments which can serve to smooth price volatility in supply markets can also opportunistically be used at the expense of the middlesection in food supply chains (i.e., mainly small and medium sized producers). The aim of this article is to identify the legal-economic mechanisms that effect price transfers in food supply chains in the European Union and define policy adjustments to improve pricing mechanisms, while safeguarding the interests of the processing industry. Policy alternatives to improve the smooth functioning of notably intermediate markets in food supply chains are the restructuring of competition law, improved processor information management and creating transparency of value added in the supply chain by means of labelling devices.

Realizing institutions and regulations that foster economic growth is an essential asset for contemporary economies. This book investigates practices and options for steering individual and firm behaviour that prevents unacceptable externalities and boosts public interests. These multi-dimensional interactions are investigated in three areas; innovativeness, especially in terms of IP rights; food safety requirements and the impact on EU-competitiveness; and economic stability, particularly within the banking industry. The book provides complementary views and offers clear and relevant conclusions.

Differences in transaction costs (i.e. costs of information processing, monitoring and control) between firms in local supply chains as well as in an international setting may have a negative impact on competitiveness and on creation of value added. Transaction cost disequilibrium is defined as a state in which transaction costs exceed the transaction benefits from the exchange of assets. The goal of this article is to assess whether such a disequilibrium exists for European food supply chains; if so, what its effects are and how it can be reduced. Transaction cost disequilibrium will be investigated at two levels: international competition and within local supply chains. The first focuses on the competitiveness of supply chains in global markets, the second especially regards the competitive position of companies within a single supply chain. To address our research question, we gathered empirical data by means of survey questionnaires and interviews in 2007 and 2008. The results show that internationally differences in transaction costs exist, but perceived disadvantages of EU food firms towards the US are being outweighed by perceived transaction benefits (i.e. preferred higher levels of food safety). However, within local supply chains SMEs are confronted with more than average transaction and compliance costs. Transaction benefits can only partially be reaped, especially because of a lack of transparency of the origin of value added to consumers. Proposed improvements to the competitive position of SMEs - contingent upon supply chain structure and product characteristics - include up-scaling, improvement of innovative power, co-labelling as well as simplification of EU food law.

Preface Introduction: 1. Quantifying the agri-food supply chain: overview and new research directions J.H.M. Wijnands and C.J.M. Ondersteijn.- Measuring performance in agri-food chains: 2. Performance measurement in agri-food supply-chain networks: an overview J. G.A.J. van der Vorst. 3. Accounting standards for supply chains H. Bremmers. 4. Pricing and performance in agri-food supply chains F. Bunte. 5. Performance indicators in agri-food production chains L. Aramyan, C. Ondersteijn, O. van Kooten, A.O. Lansink.- Sharing costs, benefits, and risk in agri-food chains: 6. Retailers' supply chain, product differentiation and quality standards E. Giraud-Heraud and L.-G. Soler. 7. Liability and traceability in agri-food supply chains J.E. Hobb. 8. On the (dis)ability of the firm to quantify chains: a marketing perspective on sharing financial rewards P. Ingenbleek.- Modelling agri-food chains: 9. Profitability of 'ready-to-eat' strategies: towards modelassisted negotiation in a fresh-produce chain H. Schepers and O. van Kooten.- The value of information in agri-food chains: 10. Information management in agri-food chains G. Schiefer. 11. The insurability of product recall in food supply chains M.P.M. Meuwissen, N.I. Valeeva, A.G.J. Velthuis and R.B.M. Huirne. 12. Strategic alliances and networks in supply chains: knowledge management, learning and performance measurement T.L. Sporleder.- Supply chain organization and chain performance: 13. Quantifying strategic choice along the vertical coordination continuum: implications for agri-food chain performance A.F. Wysocki, H.C. Peterson and S.B. Harsh. 14. From corporate social responsibility to chain social responsibility: consequences for chain organization J.J. de Vlieger. 15. Governance structures in the Dutch fresh-produce industry J. Bijman. 16. Effective partnerships for agri-food chains: the impact of supply-chain partnerships on supplier performance in the UKfresh-produce industry R. Duffy and A. Fearne. List of participants.

This paper measures the economic impact of reductions in the exposure of agricultural crops to mixtures of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and sulphurdioxide (SO2) in the Netherlands. This provides an indication of the benefits of policy measures directed to reducing nitrogen and sulphur emissions. A reduction in air pollution raises crop yield and supply. The prices of some crops are regulated by the EU. An increase in the supply of these crops affects farmer income through the effect on the quantity sold. The price of non-regulated crops, however, decreases with a rise in supply. For these crops, farmer income is affected both by the effects on quantity and price. Consumer surplus is positively affected by price decreases. A reduction in NOx and SO2 of 20% and 60% respectively is estimated to increase producer income with 96 million guilders annually and consumer surplus with 90 million guilders. These increases sum to 1% of crop turnover and 6% of total income from crop production.

The extent of yield reduction and economic loss caused by air pollution has been estimated for The Netherlands. Based on available data on direct effects only, each species was designated as sensitive, moderately sensitive or tolerant. On a nationwide scale, only ozone (O3), sulphur dioxide (SO2), and hydrogen fluoride (HF) exceeded effect thresholds. Effects from pollutant combinations were assumed to be additive. Yield reductions were calculated, using 10 exposure-response relationships and concentration data from the Dutch air pollution monitoring network. Changes in air pollution levels result in changes in supply. By multiplying the supply with the current price, the so-called crop volume was calculated. Subsequently, changes in crop volume were converted into economic terms, taking into account demand elasticity. On the basis of these calculations, air pollution in The Netherlands reduces total crop volume by 5%:3.4% by O3, 1.2% by SO2, and 0.4% by HF. The slope of the nonlinear relationship between crop volume reduction and exposure level increases at higher concentrations. In general, air pollution causes relatively little loss to producers, since yield reductions are largely compensated by higher prices. If air pollution in The Netherlands would be reduced to background concentrations, consumers would experience a net gain of Dfl 640 million (US 320 million dollars). Although large amounts of data were attained through literature and our own experience for this study, many assumptions still had to be made to arrive at these conclusions. With the current available knowledge, validation of our results in the field is not yet possible.

This paper stresses that in order to understand the current restructuring processes in the food system it is necessary to take explicitly into account the role of power as a driving organizational force. Agricultural economics, drawing pervasively on the walrasian model, has mainly analysed power in the form of market and bargaining power. Stemming from different definitions of power, the paper focuses on some definitions suggested by the new institutional economics and the network theory, showing their relevance to the analysis of the food market.