Volume 18, Issue 1 - Food Stocks and Food Security: Guest Editor: Andrew Schmitz

The 2007/08 food crisis, which revived interest in public stocks for food security purposes in different parts of the world, has sparked heated debates at every Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organization (WTO) since the Bali Ministerial in December 2013. At the heart of these debates are the current rules of the WTO that apply to public stockholding and how they limit (or not) the ability of a government to constitute food stocks and pursue its food security objectives. This article discusses the current WTO rules that apply to food stockpiling and the rationale behind them. It describes the current WTO disciplines, notably in the area of domestic support, and examines the different types of support provided by the WTO Members under their public stockholding programs. It concludes by looking at the main arguments for and against the current rules.

We revisit the underlying economics of commodity storage and its relation to food security by first clarifying the standard model used to analyze the economic efficiency and distributional effects of commodity storage programs. We find that producers prefer stabilization, although their incomes are more variable, while consumers are indifferent. However, numerical simulations indicate that physical stocks will build up inexorably over a sustained period or the government will need to raise prices continuously over a prolonged period. For the least developed countries facing fluctuating world prices, government should guarantee the price received by producers because, with price uncertainty, farmers could experience losses even under a ‘good’ weather outcome; this would guarantee the producer price, benefitting farmers, while allowing the consumer price to vary with the world price benefits consumers as they prefer price instability. In some cases, however, the government may wish to impose a price ceiling so that households living at or near subsistence can afford to buy grain – an argument based on the grounds of food security. Numerical simulations indicate that such a mixed-price policy increases the wellbeing of both consumers and producers. Physical storage is not a necessity.

Storage policies are used in many countries to smooth price volatility and thereby support food security. When there is a global decrease in food supply caused by a number of extreme weather effects, food reserves are expected to reduce the potential negative implications for households with low purchasing power. In this paper, the properties of such a stockpiling policy are assessed and compared to a policy with storage but without stockpiling. The results show that a stockholding policy is an expensive strategy that generates economic benefits only in extreme cases.

This paper examines the role of storage and trade on food security with respect to milled rice in India for the period 1966–2013. Data on food balances, prices, and population obtained from FAOSTAT allow for the observation of the status quo with storage and trade. Then, using a spatial equilibrium framework, the outcomes without storage or trade are simulated. Our results are consistent with the literature with respect to welfare effects. Storage results in net welfare gains to society, although producers gain while consumers lose. Producers receive a welfare gain from net exports while consumers gain from net imports. From a food security perspective, the use of storage has provided benefits to consumers by increasing stability in the market, as seen through decreased standard deviation in both domestic rice prices and per capita availability. The results are mixed with respect to stability from trade.

Many countries in the developing world use public stockholding programs to stabilize prices for both farmers and consumers. Governments directly purchase and store staple grains, and then sell them to processors or consumers, often at heavily subsidized prices. Despite the substantial costs of these stockholding programs, little is known about their effectiveness in mitigating retail price swings. This paper estimates the effects of purchase and sales activities of the Zambian Food Reserve Agency (FRA) on monthly maize market prices across more than thirty markets in Zambia from 2003 to 2008. To deal with the endogeneity in purchases and sales, we use predicted FRA purchase and sales targets as instrumental variables. Controlling for other policies, we find evidence that FRA activities stabilize retail prices in major district markets within the cropping year. Results show that FRA purchases raise local prices for surplus maize producers about 5 % on average at the time of harvest, and that FRA sales help lower the prices to consumers during the lean season up to 7 %. However, we find limited evidence that the FRA is able to reduce price volatility between years.

In Ethiopia, 95 % of total agricultural output comes from some 11 million smallholder farmers. A relatively significant proportion of the food grown in the country is stored at the household level by smallholder farm households, mainly for own consumption. Storage losses, generally perceived to be high, have significant implications for household food security. This study provides a microeconomic perspective of commodity storage, post-harvest losses (PHL), and food security in Ethiopia. It relies on a large-scale household panel dataset, the Ethiopia Socioeconomic Survey (ESS), which comprises 4,000 households in rural areas and small towns that are representative of the most populous regions of Ethiopia. The data were collected as part of the World Bank’s LSMS-ISA project; it involved three “waves” or collection periods: 2011/12, 2013/14, and 2015/16. Data from only the second and third waves were used to estimate a random-effects probit model. Findings show that the magnitude of PHL is substantial: damage is due to rodents and rotting related to traditional storage facilities, poor ventilation, humidity/temperature, and undesirable post-harvest handling. Findings also show that PHL decreases with better market access and improved storage practices. Mitigation measures that improve and promote modern grain storage facilities appear to provide a double dividend – reducing PHL while addressing food insecurity.

While storage losses at the farm are often assumed to be an important contributor to presumed large postharvest losses in developing countries, reliable and representative data on these losses are often lacking. We study farmers’ storage decisions and self-reported storage losses for grains based on two large-scale household surveys conducted in major agricultural areas in Ethiopia. We show that a relatively large share of grain production is stored by farm households for own consumption and that storage technologies are rudimentary. Farmers’ self-reported storage losses amount to an average of 4 % of all grains stored and 2 % of total harvest. These storage losses differ significantly by socioeconomic variables and wealth, as well as by crop and humidity. We further see strong spatial heterogeneity in storage losses being significantly higher in southwest Ethiopia. Efforts to scale up the adoption of improved storage technologies to reduce storage losses at the farm level should consider these characteristics.