IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/331974.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The revival of interest in self-sufficiency in Indonesia and its likely consequences

Author

Listed:
  • Vanzetti, David
  • Setyoko, Nur Rakhman
  • Trewin, Ray
  • Permani, Risti

Abstract

Following the global spike in food prices in 2008, there has been a renewed interest in food security. A modest increase in prices over long-term trend in 2009 and some forecasts of higher commodity prices in the longer term have reinforced concerns. In addition, export bans imposed by some countries in 2008 lend support to the view that the international market can no longer be relied upon to deliver adequate supplies at reasonable prices. In response, many countries are attempting to reduce reliance on imports and achieve self-sufficiency where possible. In Indonesia, policies are being implemented to increase domestic production of not only staples such as rice, but of non-staple products such as sugar and soybeans. Furthermore, policies have been introduced to reduce the country’s dependence on beef imports, with the objective to move to becoming 90 per cent self sufficient by 2014. A computable general equilibrium model, GTAP, is used to analyse the impacts of moving towards complete self-sufficiency in live cattle and beef. Before running the scenarios, the Armington elasticity between domestic and imported cattle is estimated for Indonesia rather than using those provided. The revised, lower, estimate significantly influences the results, suggesting virtually eliminating cattle and beef imports beef is still achievable, but at an even more significant cost to consumers and taxpayers. Annual welfare would be reduced by an estimated US$458 million if cattle and beef imports were reduced by 90 per cent. Alternative policies may be more suitable. A $40 million subsidy to cattle producers is a transfer that creates fewer distortions and welfare losses but is well short of the needed to achieve self-sufficiency. A policy of subsidising research and development would provide greater gains, although these could take some additional time to show benefits.

Suggested Citation

  • Vanzetti, David & Setyoko, Nur Rakhman & Trewin, Ray & Permani, Risti, 2010. "The revival of interest in self-sufficiency in Indonesia and its likely consequences," Conference papers 331974, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:331974
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/331974/files/4818.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yuko Kinoshita & Nauro F. Campos, 2003. "Why Does Fdi Go Where it Goes? New Evidence From the Transition Economies," IMF Working Papers 2003/228, International Monetary Fund.
    2. J. M. C. Santos Silva & Silvana Tenreyro, 2006. "The Log of Gravity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 88(4), pages 641-658, November.
    3. Laura Resmini, 2000. "The Determinants of Foreign Direct Investment in the CEECs: New evidence from sectoral patterns," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 8(3), pages 665-689, November.
    4. Martin, Will & Pham, Cong S., 2008. "Estimating the gravity model when zero trade flows are frequent," Working Papers eco_2008_03, Deakin University, Department of Economics.
    5. Bergstrand, Jeffrey H. & Egger, Peter, 2007. "A knowledge-and-physical-capital model of international trade flows, foreign direct investment, and multinational enterprises," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 278-308, November.
    6. Ellingsen, Gaute & Likumahuwa, Winfried & Nunnenkamp, Peter, 2006. "Outward FDI by Singapore: a different animal?," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 3947, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. James E. Anderson, 2011. "The Gravity Model," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 3(1), pages 133-160, September.
    2. Fernando Mistura & Caroline Roulet, 2019. "The determinants of Foreign Direct Investment: Do statutory restrictions matter?," OECD Working Papers on International Investment 2019/01, OECD Publishing.
    3. Eddy Bekkers & Indre Macskasi, 2015. "Sectoral Determinants of Foreign Affiliate Sales," Economics working papers 2015-07, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.
    4. Tamaş Anca, 2020. "Why should the gravity model be taught in business education?," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 14(1), pages 422-433, July.
    5. Mariam Camarero & Laura Montolio & Cecilio Tamarit, 2022. "Explaining German outward FDI in the EU: a reassessment using Bayesian model averaging and GLM estimators," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 62(2), pages 487-511, February.
    6. Konstantinos Dellis, 2018. "Financial development and FDI flows: evidence from advanced economies," Working Papers 254, Bank of Greece.
    7. Anne-Célia Disdier & Lionel Fontagné, 2010. "Trade impact of European measures on GMOs condemned by the WTO panel," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 146(3), pages 495-514, September.
    8. Laura Resmini, 2003. "Economic integration and regional patterns of industry location in transition countries," ERSA conference papers ersa03p399, European Regional Science Association.
    9. Bo Xiong & John Beghin, 2017. "Disentangling Demand-Enhancing And Trade-Cost Effects Of Maximum Residue Regulations," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: John Christopher Beghin (ed.), Nontariff Measures and International Trade, chapter 6, pages 105-108, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    10. Sosa Andrés, Maximiliano & Nunnenkamp, Peter & Busse, Matthias, 2013. "What drives FDI from non-traditional sources? A comparative analysis of the determinants of bilateral FDI flows," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 7, pages 1-53.
    11. Kox, Henk L.M. & Rojas Romasgosa, Hugo, 2019. "Gravity estimations with FDI bilateral data: Potential FDI effects of deep preferential trade agreements," MPRA Paper 96318, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Desbordes, Rodolphe & Vicard, Vincent, 2009. "Foreign direct investment and bilateral investment treaties: An international political perspective," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 372-386, September.
    13. Adrián Rabadán & Ángela Triguero, 2021. "Influence of food safety standards on trade: Evidence from the pistachio sector," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(3), pages 489-514, July.
    14. Harms, Philipp & Shuvalova, Daria, 2020. "Cultural distance and international trade in services: A disaggregate view," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 44(2).
    15. Mariam Camarero & Sergi Moliner & Cecilio Tamarit, 2021. "Is there a euro effect in the drivers of US FDI? New evidence using Bayesian model averaging techniques," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 157(4), pages 881-926, November.
    16. Valeria Costantini & Francesco Crespi, 2013. "Public policies for a sustainable energy sector: regulation, diversity and fostering of innovation," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 401-429, April.
    17. Chen, Natalie & Novy, Dennis, 2008. "International Trade Integration: A Disaggregated Approach," CEPR Discussion Papers 7103, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. repec:awi:wpaper:0550 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Yiu Por (Vincent) Chen, 2016. "Fiscal Decentralization, Rural Industrialization and Undocumented Labour Mobility in Rural China, 1982–87," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(9), pages 1469-1482, September.
    20. Martin,William J., 2020. "Making Gravity Great Again," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9391, The World Bank.
    21. Buchen, Clemens, 2010. "Emerging economic systems in Central and Eastern Europe – a qualitative and quantitative assessment," EconStor Theses, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, number 37141, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:331974. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gtpurus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.