WORLD BANK TECHNICAL PAPER NUMBER 327 Surveillance of Agricultural Price and Trade Policies A Handbook for Paraguay Alberto Valdes and Barry Schaeffer in collaboration with Julio Martin MOlE RECENT WORLD BANK TECHNICAL PAPERS No. 251 Sharma, Rietbergen, Heimo, and Patel, A Strategyfor the Forest Sector in Sub-Saharan Africa No. 252 The World Bank/FAO/UNIDO/Industry Fertilizer Working Group, World and Regional Suppjl and Demand Balances for Nitrogen, Phosphate, and Potash, 1992/93-1998/99 No. 253 Jensen and Malter, Protected Agriculture: A Global Review No. 254 Frischtak, Governance Capacity and Econonmic Reform in Developing Countries No. 255 Mohan, editor, Bibliography of Publications: Technical Department, Africa Region, July 1987 to April 1994 No. 256 Campbell, Design and Operation of Smallilolder Irrigatiot itn Southi Asia No. 258 De Geyndt, Managinig the Quiality of Health Care in Developing Coulitries No. 259 Chaudry, Reid, and Malik, editors, Civil Service Reform in Latin America and the Caribbean: Proceedings of a Conference No. 260 Humphrey, Payment Systems: Principles, Practice, and Improvements No. 261 Lynch, Provision for Children with Special Educationial Needs in the Asia Region No. 262 Lee and Bobadilla, Health Statistics for the Americas No. 263 Le Moigne, Subramanian, Xie, and Giltner, editors, A Guide to the Formulationi of Water Resources Strategy No. 264 Miller and Jones, Organic and Compost-Based Grozwing Mediafor Tree Seedlinig Nurseries No. 265 Viswanath, Buildinig Partnershipsfor Poverty Reductioni: The Participatory Project Planning Approach of/the Womell's Enterprise Management Training Outreach Program (WEMTOP) No. 266 Hill and Bender, Developing the Regulatory Environmzent for Competitive Agricultural Markets No. 267 Vald6s and Schaeffer, Surveillinice of Agricultural Prices and Trade: A Handbookfor tihe Dominican Republic No. 268 Valdes and Schaeffer, Surveillanice of Agricultural Prices and Trade: A Handbook for Colombia No. 269 Scheierling, Overconming Agricultural Pollution of Water: The Challenige of Integrating Agricultural and Envirotniental Policies in the Europeant Union No. 270 Banerjee, Rehabilitationi of Degraded Forests in Asia No. 271 Ahmed, Technological Developmenit and Pollution Abatement: A Studyl of How Enterprises Are Findzing Alternatives to Chlorofluorocarbons No. 272 Greaney and Kellaghan, Equity Issues in Public Examinations in Developing Counitries No. 273 Grimshaw and Helfer, editors, Vetizver Grassfor Soil and Water Conservationi, Land Rehabilitation, and Embankment Stabilization: A Collection of Papers and Newsletters Compiled by the Vetiver Netzvork No. 274 Govindaraj, Murray, and Chellaraj, Health Expenditures in Latin America No. 275 Heggie, Managemtient and Finranicintg of Roads: An Agen1dafor Reforiti No. 276 Johnson, Quality Review Schiemnesfor Auditors: Their Potential for Sub-Saharan Africa No. 277 Convery, Applying Environmental Econot0mics in Africa No. 278 Wijetilleke and Karunaratne, Air Quality Managemient: Considerations for Developing Countries No. 279 Anderson and Ahmed, The Casefor Solar Energy Investme nts No. 280 Rowat, Malik, and Dakolias, Iudicial Reform in Latin America and the Caribbean: Proceedings of a World Bank Conference No. 281 Shen and Contreras-Hermosilla, Environamental and Economic Issues in Forestny: Selected Case Studies in Asia No. 282 Kim and Benton, Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Onchocerciasis Control Program (OCP) No. 283 Jacobsen, Scobie and Duncan, Statutory Intervention in Agricultuiral Marketing: A New Zealand Perspective No. 284 Vald6s and Schaeffer in collaboration with Roldos and Chiara, Surveillance of Agricultulral Price and Trade Policies: A Handbookfor Uruguay No. 285 Brehm and Castro, Thie Marketfor Water Righits in Chiile: Major Issues No. 286 Tavoulareas and Charpentier, Clean Coal Technologiesfor Developing Countries No. 287 Gillham, Bell, Arin, Matthews, Rumeur, and Hearn, Cotton Productioni Prospectsfor the Next Decade No. 288 Biggs, Shaw, and Srivastiva, Technological Capabilities and Learnini,g in African Enterprises No. 289 Dinar, Seidl, Olem, Jorden, Duda, and Johnson, Restoring and Protecting the World's Lakes and Reservoirs (List continues on the inside back cover) WORLD BANK TECHNICAL PAPER NO. 327 Surveillance of Agricultural Price and Trade Policies A Handbookfor Paraguay Alberto Valdes and Barry Schaeffer in collaboration with Julio Martin The World Bank Washington, D. C. Copyright © 1996 The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/THE WORLD BANK 1818 H Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20433, U.S.A. All rights reserved Manufactured in the United States of America First printing August 1996 Technical Papers are published to communicate the results of the Bank's work to the development com- munity with the least possible delay. The typescript of this paper therefore has not been prepared in ac- cordance with the procedures appropriate to formal printed texts, and the World Bank accepts no responsibility for errors. Some sources cited in this paper may be informal documents that are not readily available. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the author(s) and should not be attributed in any manner to the World Bank, to its affiliated organizations, or to members of its Board of Executive Directors or the countries they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this publication and accepts no responsibility whatsoever for any consequence of their use. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this volume do not imply on the part of the World Bank Group any judgment on the legal sta- tus of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. The material in this publication is copyrighted. Requests for permission to reproduce portions of it should be sent to the Office of the Publisher at the address shown in the copyright notice above. The World Bank encourages dissemination of its work and will normally give permission promptly and, when the reproduction is for noncommercial purposes, without asking a fee. Permission to copy portions for classroom use is granted through the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., Suite 910, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, Massachusetts 01923, U.S.A. The complete backlist of publications from the World Bank is shown in the annual Index of Publica- tions, which contains an alphabetical title list (with full ordering information) and indexes of subjects, au- thors, and countries and regions. The latest edition is available free of charge from the Distribution Unit, Office of the Publisher, The World Bank, 1818 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20433, U.S.A., or from Publications, The World Bank, 66, avenue d'Iena, 75116 Paris, France. ISSN: 0253-7494 Both authors work in the Latin America Technical Department of the World Bank. Alberto Vald6s is an agricul- tural adviser, Barry Schaeffer is an agricultural economist. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Vald6s, Alberto Surveillance of agricultural price and trade policies: a handbook for Paraguay / Alberto Valdes and Barry Schaeffer; in collaboration with Julio Martin. p. cm. - (World Bank technical paper, ISSN 0253-7494 ; no. 327) ISBN 0-8213-3694-0 1. Agricultural prices-Government policy-Paraguay-Statistics. 2. Farm produce-Paraguay-Statistics. 3. Produce trade-Paraguay -Statistics. 1. Schaeffer, Barry, 1957- . II. Title. III. Series. HD1897.75.V354 1996 338.1'8-dc20 96-27955 CIP Contents FOREWORD .........................................................v ABSTRACT ........................................................ vii PREFACE ........................................................ ix ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................................ xi INTRODUCTION .........................................................1 CHAPTER 1: PROTECTION INDICATORS DEFINED .........................................................3 Definition of Indicators ......................................................_3 Data Assembly .......................................................3 Nominal Rate of Protection (NPR) ........................................................5 Effective Protection Rate (EPR) ........................................................8 Producer Subsidy Equivalent (PSE) .......................................................11 Effective Rate of Assistance (ERA) ...................................................... 13 CHAPTER 2: PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS .................................... 17 Overview ...................................................... 1 7 Evolution and Current State of Trade Policy ....................................................... 17 Who Received the Hidden Income Transfer? ...................................................... 20 Individual Commodities ...................................................... 24 APPENDIX: COMMODITY CHARTS AND PROTECTION INDICATOR CALCULATION TABLES ........................................................ 31 .i.i I FOREWORD Latin America and Caribbean countries are at different stages of a policy reform process involving their overall economies and their agriculture sector. Agricultural trade and price policy reform are emerging as particularly complex and controversial topics. The Surveillance project, for which this Handbook was prepared, was undertaken by the Advisory Group of the Technical Department in the Latin America and Caribbean Region to offer a framework for the analysis and monitoring of agricultural price and trade policy reforms. Each Handbook presents a quantitative analysis of the structure of incentives for agricultural activities and measures income transfers as a result of government policies for the country concerned. Quantification, and the resulting transparency, can be an effective deterrent against discriminatory treatment regarding agricultural pricing and trade. Sri-Ram Aiyer Director Technical Department Latin America and the Caribbean Region v ABSTRACT This is one of a series of handbooks which have arisen from a Surveillance project to evaluate agricultural price and trade interventions in eight Latin American countries for seven commodities for the period 1984 to 1994. The countries included in this Surveillance project are Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Paraguay and Uruguay. The aim of the project is to make transparent the effects of agricultural trade and price policies on agricultural incentives. The level and extent of protection and export taxation is often largely unknown, due to policy instruments and administrative measures that are difficult to quantify. To achieve this goal of transparency and comparability across products and countries, a common methodology was applied to each country to calculate four policy indicators: Nominal Protection Rate (NPR), Effective Protection Rate (EPR), Effective Rate of Assistance (ERA), and Producer Subsidy Equivalent (PSE). This Handbook presents and discusses the results and methodology for Paraguay on cotton, soybeans, sugar, and wheat for 1984-1993. vii PREFACE How level is the playing field for agriculture after the initiation of trade and price reforms? Agricultural price interventions in Latin America were predominantly implemented using restrictions such as discretionary import and export licenses, direct price regulations, burdensome customs clearance procedures, and fixed and variable tariffs. The level and extent of protection and export taxation -- the hidden income transfers -- were largely unknown, due to the use of complex policy instruments. With the maze of overlapping effects it was virtually impossible to ascertain the effect of these impacts across subsectors. A consequence of this lack of transparency in the incentive's framework resulted in a lack of political pressure in an attempt to attain a fair playing field within the agricultural market. Like most countries in Latin America, Paraguay does not have a 'transparency institution' providing greater public awareness of the way in which activities in agriculture and other sectors can sometimes receive preferential treatment. Most countries in Latin America are beginning to embark on a unilateral process of tariffication with bound tariffs, eliminating quota restrictions and also removing export taxes. Beginning in 1989, Paraguay first initiated reforms by removing restrictive multiple exchange rates that heavily taxed producers of exports. The results have been an increase in both production and exports. The Surveillance project tackles a major gap in the analysis of trade and price policy for agriculture. To provide transparency, countries require a mechanism which enables vigorous screening and monitoring of price interventions. Once reforms are undertaken, what indicators can be used to analyze surveillance of price interventions? For this report a quantitative assessmnent of trade and price policy interventions has been carried out involving seven commodities for eight Latin American and Caribbean countries during 1984-1994. These countries are Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Paraguay and Uruguay. Four policy indicators, Nominal and Effective Rates of Protection (NPR and EPR), Producer Subsidy Equivalent (PSE) and the Effective Rate of Assistance (ERA) were used. To achieve comparability across products and countries, a common methodology and formatting was applied to the data to calculate the four policy indicators. Gauged annually, these indicators expose subsidies and taxes in specific commodity markets. It is proposed that such surveillance be institutionalized and undertaken periodically as a monitoring mechanism to assess agricultural trade and price reform. The main results for Paraguay are discussed in Chapter 2. Alberto Valdes Agricultural Adviser Latin American and the Caribbean Advisory Group lx ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We would like to thank our collaborator Julio Martin for his substantial contribution to this document. Julio Martin was responsible for assembling the raw data series used in this document; for providing a number of background computations; for supplying us with information on the market structure of each of the agricultural commodities covered in the study; and, for commenting on our interpretation of the results derived from the study. The authors are particularly grateful to Melanie Meyer for her excellent assistance in the various revisions of this report. xi INTRODUCTION The Surveillance Study seeks to provide a consistent framework and yardstick with which to measure the progress of price and trade reforms. As a part of that study, this Handbook has the following goals: to explain each quantitative tool used to assess trade and price policy with respect to a commodity (Chapter 1); and to present the results along with supporting documentation for the calculation of protection indicators (Chapter 2 and the Appendix). Beginning in 1985 and continuing through 1993, this project's goal is to assess: historical agricultural price policy (i.e., prior to reforms); and current agricultural price policy. Four policy indicator measures of assessment have been applied to several major importable and exportable agricultural commodities, they are: Nominal Protection Rate (NPR); Effective Protection Rate (EPR); Producer Subsidy Equivalent (PSE), and Effective Rate ofAssistance (ERA). Chapter 1 explains these policy indicators. Each is subject to limitations and is an approximation. Using the four indicators together means that the NPRs and EPRs are complementary to the PSEs and ERAs. The first two are effective in measuring the structure of incentives as affected by price interventions. The latter two are effective in quantifying the combined effect of price and non-price policies on income transfers between producers and the rest of the economy. Combined, the four provide insight into a sector's aims and incentives. A tariff-equivalent approach based on direct border/domestic price comparison was used to estimate the market price support component to these indicators. While we expect that trade and price policy intervention explain most of the observed price wedge, one cannot rule out that domestic market structure in the particular activity will also influence the results. Thus, not all of the price wedge observed is policy induced. The four indicators help readers to see the results in terms of a broad picture. However, depending on how the question is posed, different analysts can arrive at very different numbers (for the same product in a given year). Thus, it is necessary to provide detailed information concerning the background computations. The analysis of these indicators allows policymakers to examine various policy issues. For example, which activities help or hinder agricultural price and trade policy? Are transfers price-based, or do they exist as direct income transfers? Are reforms already in place that reduce the level of protection? How much and how accurately do the quantitative indicators reflect exogenous shocks, such as changes in border prices? How 1 uniform is the structure of incentives across various activities? Does the trade regime result in significant anti-export bias? Below are examples, discussions and results directly related to Paraguay. For the interested reader, a summary of the protection indicators appears in Tables 5 and 6 (at the end of Chapter 2). The main results are shown on pages 17 and 18, figures I a and lb, and tables 5, 6 and 7. Figures 1 a and lb illustrate income transfers. Taking both I a and lb together, the reforms of 1989 caused a sharp decline in the level of taxation. Most recently (1991) some positive transfers have occurred. 2 CHAPTER 1 PROTECTION INDICATORS DEFINED Definition of Indicators In order to measure periodically the structure of incentives for various agricultural activities, and to produce a consistent, quantitative assessment of income transfers between agriculture and the rest of the economy, indicators must be comparable over time, across commodities, and across countries. Further, they must be easy to measure and understand, and must accurately reflect the incentive structure of underlying policy instrument(s). Data Assembly The first step is to examine and understand the data used to calculate the indicators. A review of the characteristics of the indicators follows a discussion of the process by which the data were assembled. The Surveillance Project's analysis begins with a broad overview of a given commodity's marketing chain in the country concerned, followed by information gathering. Is a commodity exportable or importable? How many steps exist in the chain? Is any significant processing required? A typical chain involves transport to processor - processing - transport to the wholesaler - wholesaler's activity - transport to port facility - lading and shipment. Once the marketing chain has been delineated, each step of the chain can be analyzed with cost and price estimates. The NPR, EPR, PSE and ERA all involve comparison of a domestic price with its border equivalent. This is true for both inputs and outputs. The next logical step in the surveillance process is to focus on pricing instruments using the marketing chain derived above as a sequential series of "price points." Relevant domestic prices of both outputs and inputs need to be obtained before assembling the database to calculate protection rates. It is also necessary, in the case of inputs, to acquire the technological coefficients of converting input into output. Domestic prices should ideally be acquired at the farm level. In reality, however, most prices are based on those at the central market, warehouse or auction (outputs) or at retail (inputs). This information can be obtained from farm budget data. Direct payments through subsidies, and such costs as taxes and payments to marketing boards should be accounted for at the farm level in addition to those prices paid and received directly. After delivery of the commodity to the central market, transportation and marketing costs are an important consideration as are any necessary processing costs. Internal transport and related costs can be substantial, and provide for a 'natural' rate of protection to producers of importables and an implicit tax to the producers of exportables. Physical transformation of the raw product, i.e., wheat ground into flour, soybeans crushed into oil and meal, and cotton ginned into seed and fiber, 3 should also be taken into account. Thus, conversion factors must take into consideration such processes. Moreover, price subsidies and taxes may exist in addition to the direct costs. Transportation should also be considered a major cost unless the processing center/central market is close to the port of entry/exit. At the port of entry/exit in the marketing chain all tariffs, taxes, subsidies, port charges and other costs associated with either the importation or exportation of a commodity must be accounted for. This stage in the marketing chain is the most difficult to examine because it is here that the government (or other interested party) is most likely to intervene. Additionally, border prices of the commodity and its inputs are identified at this stage. For example, the government may charge large user fees that are implicit tariffs if state trading is a factor. Border prices, when converted to domestic currency from world prices, reflect the opportunity cost to the economy of producing the commodity. This focus on the use of opportunity cost as a benchmark against which trade and price policy is assessed is the essence of the economic approach used in this study. Many problems exist in selecting the world price benchmark. If grade and quality differences exist between the internationally traded product and the local commodity, problems arise because one could be comparing dissimilar products. Thus, the estimate of protection may be measuring differences in the two products and not protection. An example would be white vs. paddy rice. In addition, the world price itself can be misleading if the markets are thinly traded (for example, white maize). At this stage in the marketing chain a proper exchange rate should be identified. The criterion for selection in the Surveillance report was the exchange rate farmers/processors/exporters receive for their product. In most cases it was the official exchange rate. However, existence of multiple exchange rates or some other form of indirect taxation using the exchange rate complicates the task of defining a valid rate. The Surveillance Project did not include an adjustment for indirect effects of economywide policies in the real exchange rate.1 Thus, all calculations of the four indicators, NPRs, PSEs, ERAs, and EPRs, are at the relevant nominal exchange rate. A critical step before the calculation of the indicators is price adjustment. In determining the adjustments three decisive factors are taken into consideration. The first is whether the commodity is an exportable or importable. The second is the place or point of competition between the domestically produced commodity and its overseas counterpart. The third is the point in the marketing chain at which the two prices are to be compared. For the exportable, the point of competition is normally the port. Using the central farm marketing point as the place of comparison, the costs of the marketing chain must be subtracted See Maurice Schiff and Alberto Vald6s, "The Political Economy of Agricultural Pricing," Economics in Developing Countries, vol. 4 (Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press, 1992). 4 from the f.o.b. border price to obtain the farm-level price. The net result is a border equivalent price that can be meaningfully compared to the domestic price. For an importable, the point of competition is frequently the processor. Again using the central farm marketing point as the place of comparison, the marketing chain cost must be added to the c.i.f. border price until the point of competition is reached. The costs are then subtracted from the central farm marketing point. These adjustments provide an accurate comparison between the domestic price and its efficiency benchmark. Below, an example of the calculation together with actual illustrations of these adjustments is given along with discussions of each indicator. Nominal Rate of Protection (NPR) In this study the Nominal Protection Rate is defined as the ratio of the prevailing domestic price relative to the appropriate adjusted border price in the absence of intervention. Thus, our NPR is an 'equivalent tariff measure and does not necessarily coincide with the explicit tariff for the commodity in question. The formula for the NPR for commodity i is the following: d~~~~~~~~~~~~d where Pd is the domestic price, P" is the world price of commodity i, and E0 is the exchange rate. While this calculation is relatively simple, it is very important to select accurate prices for the ratios,'and it is essential to have a thorough understanding of the domestic markets where the 2 prices are formed. Once the NPR is calculated, the results can be interpreted. Values can range from positive to negative and each has its own meaning regarding policy. A positive NPR means the producer is receiving a higher price for the commodity than he would without intervention, and the consumer is paying more for the product. Positive protection is frequently associated with importables. A negative NPR signals that the producer is being discriminated against relative to the prevailing border prices. A zero NPR suggests that the structure of protection is neutral, i.e., producers face domestic prices comparable to border prices. 2 See chapters 2. 3 and 4 in Isabelle Tsakok. Agricultural Price Policy, (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1990) for a useful reference on the NPR. EPR and PSE. 5 The following NPR calculation will help illustrate the above (see Table 1). The commodity depicted is the exportable soybeans. Table 1 is of standardized format designed to approximate the marketing chain of a commodity. Section I in the table determines the correct exchange rate and border price. Using 1991 as an example, the appropriate border price is US$167.1 per ton FOB. This represents the cost of 1 ton of soybeans purchased at the port in Paraguay. Since this study does not adjust for a possible exchange rate misalignment, the official exchange rate is used.3 For 1991, the exchange rate is 1,320.0 Paraguayan guaranies (Gs) per U.S. dollar. The costs associated with exporting the commodity are then examined. These costs are reported in section 2. In the example, three port costs are accounted for in this section. The first is the export tax (or subsidy), the second is port charges, and the third is bank expenses. Paraguay taxed the producer through a system of multiple exchange rates from 1984-1988. After 1989 it had a general export tax. Using 1991 as an illustration, the tax was Gs1O,075.8, the estimate for port charges was Gs6,650.0 and the bank charges were Gsl 1,936.0. The next step is to examine costs associated with the marketing chain. Sections 3, 4 and 5 of table I account for these costs. Five costs are reported for Paraguayan soybeans: transportation costs from the port to the processing center, transportation losses, market structure, processing costs, marketing margins and other costs. For 1991, transportation costs are Gs1O,560.0, transportation losses are Gsl,512.0, processing costs are Gsl2,500.0, marketing margins are Gs4,725, and other costs are Gs9,450.0. Finally, in many cases after accounting for all the costs, a difference still exists between the border equivalent and the domestic price. Market structure is the main cause of the difference between the two prices. Therefore, to account for these differences, adjustments can be made in each section. It is important to note that with these adjustments the border equivalent price with intervention (section 5) will equal the domestic price reported in section 6. For Paraguay, the adjustment for market structure (found in section 4) is Gs35,836.9. In section 6 appropriate domestic prices are selected. In 1991, the domestic price was Gs172,587. The NPR estimates appear in section 7. To calculate the NPR for 1991, the difference between the domestic and border equivalent price without intervention (Gs172,587- Gs146,473.6 = Gs25,761.1) is divided by the border equivalent price. The estimate for 1991 is 17.5%. Chapter 2 discusses the results. 3For a comparison of the NPRs with an without the exchange rate misalignment correction for eighteen developing countries, see Schiff and Valdes, "The Political Economy of Agricultural Pricing." 6 TABLE 1 Standardized Format Nominal Rate of Protection Country: Paraguay Type: Exportable Conmnodity: Soybeans Point of Competition: Border 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1 UNADJUSTED BORDER PRICE ExchangeRate Gs.lUSS 3910 6320 706.3 788.9 9061 1,140.6 1,218.0 1.3200 na 1,745.0 Border Pnce US$ FOB/Ton 223.3 160.9 1433 149.1 245.4 208.3 176.7 167.1 na 1860 BorderPriceinLocalCurrency 87,3103 101,688.8 101,2107 117,6186 222,367.5 237,581.0 215,2206 220,5720 na 324.570.0 2 BORDER ADJUSTMENTS Tariffs/Subsidies/Adjustments M.E.R Tax(a) (37,5706) (57,234 3) (30,902.9) (33.440.0) (49,860.0) 0.0 00 00 na 0.0 Exchangetax 00 00 0.0 0.0 00 (11,7241) (9.926.1) (10.075 8) na 00 Port Charges Bank Expenses (1,418.6) (1,429.2) (8789) (2,486.2) (2,577 3) (7,737 9) (6,551.2) (6,650.0) n.a (1,793 0) Storage/Handling/Loss (2,209.4) (2.177.4) (2.160.0) (3,714.6) (4,516.3) (10,675.9) (11,766.1) (11.936.0) n.a. (9,4990) BorderPrceEquivalent(with intervenbon) 46.1116 40,8479 67,269.0 77,9778 165,4139 207,443.1 186,977.2 191.9101 na 313,278.0 BorderPriceEquivalent(withoutintervenbon) 83,682.3 98,082.2 98,1719 111,417.8 215,273.9 219.1672 196.903.3 201,985.9 na 313,278.0 3 COSTS FROM BORDER TO PROCESSING (VVHOLESALE MARKET) Tanfls/SubsidieslAdjustments Transportabon (3,128.0) (5,056 0) (5,650 3) (6,310 9) (7,249.1) (9,124 6) (9,744 0) (10,560.0) n.a. 13,960.0 Other Losses (488 0) (408.0) (688.0) (624.0) (1,336 0) (1,496.0) (1,368 0) (1,512 0) n.a. 2,384.0 Border Price Equivalent after Processing (with interventon) 42,495.6 35,383.9 60,930.7 71,043.0 156,828.7 196,8225 175,865.2 179,838.1 n a 296,9340 Border Pnce Equivalent after Processing (without intervenbon) 80,066.3 92,618.2 91,8336 104,4830 206,688.7 208.5466 185,791.3 189,913.9 n.a 296,934.0 4 PROCESSING COST (WHOLESALE MARKET) Tariftf/Subsidies/Adjustments Markel Structure 24.0794 21,3961 33,6693 16,338.5 27,4294 11,451 6 19,365.5 35.8369 n a. 40,8660 Processing Costs (1,000.0) (1,955 0) (2,150.0) (3,5314) (4,733.1) (7,2491) (11,405 7) (12.500.0) na. (17.4500) Marketing Margins (1,5250) (1,275.0) (2,1500) (1,950.0) (4,175.0) (4,675.0) (4.2750) (4,7250) n.a. (7.4500) Other (3,050 0) (2,550.0) (4.300.0) (3,900.0) (8,350 0) (9,350.0) (8,550.0) (9.450 0) n a. (14.900.0) Conversion 1 0 10 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 10 n a 1.0 BorderPnceEquivalentbeforeProcessing(withinterventon) 61,000.0 51,000.0 86,0000 78,0000 167,000.0 187,0000 171.0000 189,000.0 n.a. 298.0000 BorderPnceEquivalentbeforeProcessing(withoutinterventon) 74,4913 86.838.2 83,2336 95.1015 189,4306 187.272.5 161,5606 163,2389 n.a 257,134.0 5 COSTS FROM COLLECTION POINT (FARM) TO PROCESSOR Tariffs/Subsidies/Adjustnments Transportabon (3,910.0) (6,320 0) (7,062.9) (7,888.6) (9.0614) (11,405 7) (12,180.0) (13,200 0) na (17,450.0) Other (1.037.0) (8670) (1,4620) (1,326.0) (2.839.0) (3,1790) (2,9070) (3.2130) na 00 Border Price Equivalent at Collecton Point (with intervenbon) 56,0530 43,8130 77,475.1 68,785.4 155,099.6 172,415.3 155,9130 172,5870 n.a. 280,550.0 Border Pnce Equivalent at Collection Point (without interventon) 69,544 3 79,651 2 74,708.7 85,887.0 177.530 2 172,687 8 146,473.6 146,825 9 n a 239.684.0 6 DOMESTIC PRICE Border Wholesale 61,0000 51,000.0 86,0000 78,000.0 167,0000 187,0000 171,000.0 189.0000 n a 298,000.0 Collection Point (Farm) 56.053.0 43,813 0 77,4751 68,785 4 155.0996 172.415 3 155,913.0 172.587 0 na 280,550 0 7 NPR Border vnolesale -181% -41 3% 3.3% -18.0% -11 8% -010% 58% 158% na 159% Collecton Point (Farm) -19.4% -45 0% 3 7% -19.9% -12 6% -0 2% 6 4% 17 5% n a 17 0% a Untl18g, produwrsweretaxedthroughasystemormultipleexchangeraies(M.E.RI 1984 1985 1988 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 The followng is the annuai exchange rate appihed to the commodity 223 276 491 565 703 1,141 1,218 1.320 na 1,745 Source: Surveillance Project LA TAD, 1995 Effective Protection Rate (EPR) In most cases, trade policy extends beyond output prices and into the input markets. The Effective Protection Rate (EPR) indicator accounts for these additional interventions. The EPR measures how trade barriers on a product and its tradable inputs jointly affect value-added in a particular activity. This indicator has the advantage of examining the resource allocation effect of a tariff structure. Previous work has shown that the same tariff (or NPR) can imply different Effective Rates of Protection, depending on the level of taxation on the imported inputs and on their importance in the production process. By including inputs, the EPR becomes a more encompassing instrument and, at the same time, more difficult to calculate. Inputs are often subject to both tariffs and quantitative restrictions. Product quality and defining an appropriate border price for a direct price comparison can be a problem. This study considers the principal purchased inputs including fertilizers, chemicals, seed, and the cost of operating farm machinery and equipment (tractors, combines, milking equipment, plows and fuel consumption). Calculation of the EPR is very similar to that of the NPR. Instead of being a ratio of the output prices, as is the NPR, the EPR is a ratio of the value-added at domestic prices (intervention) to value-added at world prices (without intervention). Value-added is defined as the value of output less input costs. The formula for the EPR for commodity i is the following: EPR = VA -VAir E, VAi EO where VAd and VAW are value-added at domestic and world prices, and Eo is the appropriate exchange rate. Interpretation of the EPR is similar to the NPR. For positive EPRs, the returns eamed through the activity with intervention are greater than those eamed without intervention. For negative EPRs, the reverse is true. Finally, for EPRs equal to zero, the protection factor is neutral and the returns are the same. Since EPRs are, in fact, NPRs which have been extended to include inputs, similar behavior between the two indicators is expected under certain conditions. For example, if the inputs are a small proportion of the value of output, calculating the EPR is of little value. Although the EPR provides more information, it also contains biases because of input substitution possibilities. In practice, however, these biases tend to be ignored because elasticities of substitution are virtually impossible to obtain. 8 Again, an actual EPR calculation illustrates the above (see Table 2). The commodity depicted is again the exportable soybeans. Section I contains both the domestic and border equivalent price of I ton of soybeans. The domestic price for 1991 is Gs172,587 and the border equivalent price is GsI46,825.9. It is important to note how these two prices are derived. Referring back to table 1, the two prices can be found in section 5. Their ratio minus I is the NPR (at the farm level). In effect, the concept of EPR starts where that of the NPR ends (the relationship between the domestic and border output price) and expands the NPR concept to include tradable input prices (both domestic and border). The example incorporates eight tradable direct inputs into the calculation (see section 2 of the table). The direct tradable inputs used are seeds, innoculant, fertilizer, herbicides and insecticides (three types), and gas and oil. The domestic and border prices are shown along with a technical coefficient for each input. The technical coefficient is the amount of input needed to produce 1 unit of output. For soybeans the unit is I ton. Using 1991 as an illustration, it required 27.3 kg of seed, .5 It of innoculant, 45.5 kg of fertilizer, .9 It of herbicide, .2 It of both insecticide and insecticide (contacto), and 25 It of insecticide (sistemico) to produce 1 ton of soybeans. Each of these inputs is valued at both its domestic cost (Gs650.0 per kg for seed) and border cost (Gs553.0 per kg for seed). The sum of the direct tradable inputs valued per ton at their domestic price is Gs69,477.3 and at the border price is Gs62,865.2. In section 3 (which is not shown since no indirect inputs were reported and because of space limitations), the tradable indirect inputs would be take into account. Section 3 would follow the same format as section 2. Section 4 tabulates value-added at both domestic and border equivalent prices. Value- added at domestic prices is the domestic price of output per ton less the sum of the eight directly tradable inputs valued at their domestic prices. Value-added at border equivalent prices is the border equivalent price of the output (determined from NPR calculations) less the sum of the same inputs valued at border equivalent prices. For 1991, the value of I ton of soybeans at domestic prices is Gs172,567 and Gs146,825.9 at border equivalent prices. The sum of the costs valued at domestic prices is Gs69,477.3. The same cost valued at border prices is Gs62,865.2. Therefore, value-added at domestic prices is GsIO3,109.7, and at border prices is Gs83,960.8. Section 5 shows the calculations for the EPR. For 1991, the EPR is the difference between value-added at domestic and border prices (GsIO3,109.7 - Gs83,960.8 = Gsl9,148.9), divided by value-added at border prices. The EPR resulting from this calculation is 22.8%. Chapter 2 discusses the results. 9 TABLE 2 Standardized Format Effective Rate of Protection Country. Paraguay Type. Exportable Commodity Soybean Level Farm 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1. OUTPUT Domestic Prce Gs Per MT 56,053.0 43,813.0 77,475 1 68,7854 155,099.6 172A415.3 155,913.0 172,587.0 00 280,550.0 Quantiy 1.0 10 1.0 1.0 10 10 1.0 1.0 10 1.0 Value at Domestic Pnces 56.053 0 43,813.0 77,475.1 68,785.4 155,0996. 172,415.3 155,913.0 172.587 0 0.0 280,550.0 Border Price Equivalent Gs. Per MT 69,544.3 79,851.2 74,708.7 85.8870 177,5302 172,687.8 146,473.6 146,825.9 0.0 239.683.0 Quantity 1.0 1.0 10 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 10 Value at Border Price Equivalent 69,544.3 79,651 2 74,708.7 85.887 0 177,530.2 172.687.8 146,473.6 146.825.9 00 239,683 0 2. TRADABLE DIRECT INPUTS Seeds Quantity Kg. Per MT ot Output 361 35.0 32 5 32.5 29.5 27.3 27.3 27.3 0.0 27.3 Domestic Prce Gs. per Kg. 180.0 180.0 250.0 260.0 500.0 500.0 500 0 650.0 0.0 720.0 Domestic Cost 6,500.0 6,300.0 8,125.0 8.450 0 14,772.7 13,636 4 13,636.4 17.727.3 00 19,636.4 Border Price Eq. Price Gs. per Kg 223.3 327.2 241.1 324 6 572 3 500.8 469.7 553 0 0.0 615.1 Border Price Eq. Cost 6,064.5 11,453.3 7,834.9 10,5509 16,909.2 13,657.9 12,8108 15.081 2 0.0 16,775.7 Innoculant Quantity Pkg Per MT of Output (a) 0.6 05 05 05 0.5 0.5 05 0.5 0.0 0.5 Domestic Pnce Gs. Per Pkg (a) 350.0 700 0 750.0 800.0 800 0 800 0 650.0 700.0 0 0 750.0 Domestc Cost 194 4 350.0 375.0 400 0 363.6 363.6 295.5 318.2 0.0 340.9 Border Pnce Eq. Prce Gs Per Pkg. (a) 323.2 646 4 692.5 738 7 738.7 738.7 600 2 646.4 0.0 750 0 Border Pnce Eq Cost 179.5 323.2 346.3 369.3 335.8 335 8 272.8 293. 0.0 340.9 Fertilizer Quantity Kg PerMT o Output 50 0 60 0 50.0 60 0 54 5 54 5 45.5 45.5 00 45 5 Domestic Prce Gs. per Kg 130.0 130.0 120.0 240 0 260 0 260.0 630.0 650 0 0.0 695.0 Domestic Cost 6,500.0 7,800.0 6,000 0 14,400.0 14,181.8 14.181 8 28,636 4 29,545.5 0-0 31,590 9 Border Pnce Eq. Pnce Gs per Kg. 120.0 120 0 110.8 221.6 2401 240.1 5817 600 2 00 695.0 BorderPrice Eq Cost 6.0018 7,202 2 5,540 2 13,296 4 13,094.9 13,094.9 269441.7 27,281.1 0.0 31,590.9 Herbicide Quantity Lt Per MT of Output 14 1.3 13 1 3 1 1 1.1 09 09 00 0.9 Domestic Price Gs. Per Lt. 2,045.0 5,368 0 5,600.0 6,000.0 6,000.0 5.800 0 5,500 0 6,000.0 00 10.000 0 Domestic Cost 2,840 3 6,710 0 7,000.0 7,500.0 6,818 2 6,590 9 5,000.0 5.454 5 00 9,090,9 Border Pnce Eq. Price Gs. Per Lt 1,889 3 4,956.6 5,170.8 5 540 2 5,540 2 5.355,5 5.078 5 5,540 2 0.0 10.000 0 Border Price Eq. Cost 2.622.6 6,195.8 6,463 5 6,925.2 6,295.6 6.085 8 4,616 8 5.036,5 00 9,.00 9 Insecticide Contacto Quantity Lt. Per MT ot Output 0.8 0.8 0.5 0 5 0 5 0.5 0 2 0 2 0.0 0 2 Domestic Price Gs. Pert L. 5,115.0 6,115.0 6,750 0 8,500 0 6,500.0 6,000.0 80000 9,000.0 0.0 18,000 0 Domesbc Cost 4,262.5 4.586 3 3,037.5 4 250.0 2,954.5 2 727.3 1,818.2 2,045.5 00 4,090.9 Border Price Eq Price Gs. Per Lt 4,723 0 5,646 4 6,232.7 7.848 6 6,001.8 5,540.2 7.386.9 8,310.2 0.0 18,000.0 Border Price Eq. Cost 3,935.8 4,234.8 2,804 7 3,924.3 2,728.1 2,518.3 1.678 8 1,888.7 0.0 4,090 9 Insecticde Sistemico Quantiby Lt. Per MT ot Output 06 05 0.5 0.5 05 05 0.2 02 0.0 02 Domestic Price Gs. Per Lt 4,330.0 5,710.0 8,800.0 9,000.0 9,500.0 9,500.0 9.500 0 10,500 0 0.0 14,000.0 Domestc Cost 2,405.6 2,855.0 4,400.0 4,500.0 4,318.2 4,318.2 2,1591 2,386.4 00 3,181 8 Border Price Eq. Price Gs. Per Lt. 3,998.2 5,272.4 8,125.6 8,310.2 8,771.9 8,771.9 8,771.9 9,695.3 00 14,000.0 Border Price Eq. Cost 2,2212 2,636.2 4,062.8 4.155.1 3,987 2 3,987.2 1,993.6 2.203.5 00 3,181.8 Gas-oil Quantity Lt. Per MT of Output 30.6 27.5 27.5 27 5 250 25.0 25.0 25 0 0.0 25 0 Domestic Price Gs. Per Lt. 120.0 120.0 140.0 165.0 190.0 220.0 480 0 480.0 00 520 0 Domestic Cost 3,666.7 3,300.0 3,850.0 4,537.5 4,750.0 5,500.0 12,000.0 12,000.0 0.0 13,0000 Border Price Eq. Pnce Gs PerLt 1108 110.8 129.3 152.4 175.4 203.1 443.2 443.2 0.0 5200 Border Prce Eq. Cost 3,385 7 3,047.1 3,554.9 4,189.8 4,386.0 5.078.5 11,0803 11,080.3 0.0 13,000.0 Total Direct Inputs (Domestc Prices) 26,369.4 31,901.3 32,787 5 44,037.5 48,159.1 47.318.2 63,545 5 69,477.3 N A. 80,931 8 Total Direct Inputs (Border Price) 26,411.1 35,0925 30,6073 43,411.0 47,736.8 44,758 4 58,894.9 62,865.2 NA. 78,071.2 4. VALUE ADDED At Domestic Prices 29,683.6 11,9118 44,687.6 24,747.9 106,940.5 125,0971 92,367.5 103,109.7 N.A. 199,618.2 At Intemational Prces 43,133.1 44.558.7 44,101.5 42,4760 129,7933 127,929.4 87,5787 83,9608 N.A. 161,611.8 5. EPR -312% -73.3% 1.3% -41 7% -17 6% -2.2% 55% 22 8% NA. 23.5% a One package contains 250 grams of innoculant Source. Surveillance Prmject, LATAD, 1995 Producer Subsidy Equivalent (PSE) Governments intervene in a variety of ways in an attempt to assist agricultural producers. Although price interventions represent an important form of assistance, non-price measures could be important as well. The PSE can be defined as compensation to farmers for the loss of income resulting from the removal of domestic agricultural policy measures at a given level of production. Specifically, it is the sum of net output market support, input subsidies, marketing/transport/and storage subsidies, deficiency payments, and non-price transfers (research, extension, irrigation)4. Expressed as a sum, the PSE is an absolute aggregate monetary figure and can be calculated both for individual commodities or as an overall sector PSE. However, to make the PSE comparable across commodities and countries, the aggregate PSE should be expressed as a ratio. The PSE is then a ratio of policy transfers compared to the total value of domestic production (valued at domestic prices). The formula for the PSE for commodity i is as follows: -(P- Pr Ej,) Q _)((p+ -P w Eo) TCjQ,)+ DPi+ NPTi PSEi- PlQ, PiQ where Pd and pw are the domestic and world price of commodity i, pd and pW are the domestic and world prices of inputj for commodity i. TC is the technical coefficient of inputj for commodity i, Q is the total production of commodity i, DP and NPT are the deficiency payments and non-price transfers payable to producers of commodity i, and Eo is the exchange rate. In addition to price interventions, this instrument can capture a variety of non-border types of assistance to producers. Non-border transfers cover a range of expenditures, from agricultural research and extension, public investment in irrigation, and credit subsidies, to broader benefits like tax concessions. The PSE herein covers only those public expenditures allocated to the specific commodities being analyzed.5 As a measure of iso-income rather than a unit subsidy at a given level of output, the PSE is a lump-sum budgetary substitute for both price transfers (as measured by EPR) and non-price transfers. The net income of farmers from transfers through the output and input market remains unchanged. It is important to note that this definition differs from other estimates because non-price transfers have not been included in the denominator. Our decision not to include non-price transfers is based on our opinion that farm income, as perceived by the agriculture sector and many government census departments, does not include government expenditure on research and extension, and irrigation. 4For a more detailed explanation of the PSE, see GATT, "Quantitative Measurement of Support: The PSE", Technical Paper 87,1315 (Geneva, Switzerland: GATT). September 8, 1987. 5The coverage of the non-price transfers can differ amongst various studies. For a discussion on this see Tim Josling and Stefan Tangerman, "Measuring Levels of Protection in Agriculture: A Survey of Approaches and Results" in Agriculture and Govemments in an Interdependent World: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference of Agricultural Economists, edited by A. Maunders and A. Valdes (Brookfield. VT: Gower Publishing Co.. 1990). 11 TABLE 3 STANDARDIZED FORMAT PRODUCER SUBSIDY EQUIVALENT Country: Paraguay Type: Exportable Commodity: Soybean Level: Farm 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 Market Value of Output Output (000 Tons) 748 980 700 1,170 1,397 1,615 1,795 1,402 Price Per Ton (Gs./Ton) 56,053 43,813 77,475 68,785 155,100 172,415 155,913 172,587 Total Market Value of Output (Millions) 41,900 42,937 54,233 80,479 216,671 278,377 279,804 241,973 Assistance (Millions): Market Price Support (10,085) (35,121) 1,936 (20,009) (31,335) (440) 16,940 36,118 Input Policies (117) 2,988 (1,626) (929) (696) (4,252) (8,296) (9,227) Credit Assistance 1,768 1,956 5,491 5,441 10,104 8,172 13,147 6,780 Research & Extension 283 281 290 258 463 616 800 1,320 Total Assistance (8,151) (29,897) 6,091 (15,239) (21,464) 4,096 22,592 34,990 Producer Subsidy Equivalent -19.5% -69.6% 11.2% -18.9% -9.9% 1.5% 8.1% 14.5% Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 Interpretation of the ERA is much the same as the other indicators of protection. A positive ERA indicates government intervention in favor of the producer. A negative ERA indicates that the producer is being penalized. A zero ERA implies that government interventions are having little effect in either direction. Table 4 uses the exportable soybeans an example. Section 1 estimates output assistance. Total assistance for the ERA is measured using a monetary absolute. In this case, total output is multiplied by the domestic price giving the total revenue with all intervention taken into account. Total output is multiplied by the border price equivalent giving the total revenue without taking any intervention into account. Using the year 1991 as an example, total output is 1.4 million tons while the domestic and border equivalent prices are Gs172,587 and Gs146,826, respectively. In section 2, input assistance is estimated using the same methodology as output assistance. Cultivated area or output is multiplied by the appropriate technical coefficient, and this figure is then multiplied by the domestic price and the international price of the input to obtain an estimate of total output cost. In the case of Paraguay, eight inputs (combined into five lines) were used in the calculation: seeds, innoculant, fertilizers, herbicides, insecticides (3 types), and gas and oil. Ten estimates of total individual input cost were calculated; five at domestic prices and five at border equivalent prices (see the input seed during 1991). Presented in the first line of this section is the technical coefficient of 27.3 kg of seeds needed to produce 1 ton of soybeans. The second line represents the total amount of seeds needed to produce 1.4 million tons of soybeans (technical coefficient multiplied by the annual production for 1991). Thus, the total amount of seeds used in 1991 was 38.3 million kg. The total value of seeds at domestic and border prices is then calculated. The domestic price per kg is Gs650.0 and the border price per kg is Gs553.0. By multiplying these prices per kg by the amount of seed used, the total value of seeds valued at the domestic price (Gs24,472 million) and at the border price (Gs21,144 million) is calculated. Each of the above steps is carried out for all five lines and eight inputs. Section 3 illustrates non-price assistance. Data for this frequently comes from government budget data and are aggregate totals allocated to a specific commodity. As a result, many absolutes are used. An example of this is Paraguay where two programs representing transfers to producers exists. The first transfer is for credit assistance, and in 1991 the total was 6,779.8 million. The second program was research and extension, and the total for 1991 were Gs1,319.9 million. The composite value-added calculation at both domestic and border equivalent price is shown in Section 4. In 1991, aggregate value-added at domestic prices was Gs 156,455 million and at border prices was Gs 121,217.2 million. Section 5 shows the calculated ERA. In the above example, dividing Gs156,455 million by Gs1,319.9 million and subtracting I yields an ERA for soybeans of 29.1% in 1991. 13 Table 4 Standardized Format Effective Rate of Assistance Country: Paraguay Type: Exportable Commodity: Soybean Level: Farm 1984 1985 198 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1. PRICE RELATED OUTPUT ASSISTANCE TobtaOutput ODO Tons 748 980 700 1,170 1,397 1.615 1,795 1.402 Domesic Price Gs. per MT 56,053 43.813 77,475 68,785 155,100 172,415 155,913 172,587 Total Output Value at Domestc Prices 41.899,618 42,936,740 54,232,600 80,478,951 216.670.899 278,377,065 279,804,278 241,973.015 Intemabonat Price Gs. per MT 69,544 79,65t 74,709 85,887 177,530 172,688 146,474 148,826 Total Output Value at Intemanatioa Price 51,984,337 78,058,195 52,296,124 100,487,758 248,006,072 278,817.020 262,864.144 205,855,093 2. PRICE RELATED INPUT ASSISTANCE TotalOutput ODOTons 748 980 700 1,170 1.397 1.615 1,795 1,402 Seeds Inputs Use Per KG Per MT of Output 361 350 32.5 32.5 29.5 27.3 27.3 27.3 Inputs's Total Use 26.993 34,300 22.750 38,025 41,274 44.034 48,944 38,237 Domestic Price Gs. Per KG 180 180 250 260 500 500 500 650 Input's Total Value 0 Domestic Prices 4,858,750 6.174,000 5,687,500 9,886.500 20.637,205 22,016,905 24.472.064 24.854.257 International Price Gs. Per KG 223 327 241 325 572 501 470 553 Input's Total Value§ lntemational Prices 6,028,191 11.224,217 5.484,417 12,344,498 23,621,768 22,051.701 22,990,457 21,144.405 Ferblizer Inputs Use Per Kg Per MT of Output 50.0 60.0 50.0 60.0 54.5 54.5 45.5 45.5 Inputs's Total Use 37,375 58,800 35.000 70,200 76.199 88,068 81,574 63.729 Domestic Price Gs. Per Kg 130 130 120 240 260 260 630 650 Input'sToialValue§ fDomesticPnces 4.858,750 7,644,000 4.200.000 16.848,000 19,811,718 22.897.581 51.391.334 41,423,761 Intemational Price Gs. Per Kg 120 120 111 222 240 240 582 600 Input's Total Value lntemational Prices 4.486,380 7,058.172 3,878,116 15,556.787 18.293.367 21,142,734 47,452,755 38.249.087 Innoculant Inputs Use Per Pkg Per MT of Output (a) 0.6 05 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Inputs's Total Use 415 490 350 585 635 734 816 637 Domestc Price Gs Per Pkg (a) 350 700 750 800 800 800 650 700 Inpufs Total ValueQ Domestic Prices 145,347 343,000 262.500 468,000 507,993 587.117 530,228 446.102 _ Intemabonal Pnce Gs. Per Pkg (a) 323 646 693 739 739 739 600 646 Input'sTotal Value 0 lntemational Prices 134,208 316,713 242.382 432,133 469.061 542,121 489 592 411,913 Herbicides Input'sUsePer LlPerMTofOutput 1.4 13 1.3 13 11 1.1 09 0.9 Inputs's Total Use 1,038 1,225 875 1,463 1,587 1,835 1.631 1,275 Domestic Price Gs. Per Lt 2,045 5,368 5,600 6,000 6,000 5,800 5,500 6,000 Inputs Total Valuefl Domestic Prices 2,123,108 6,575,800 4,900,000 8,775,000 9,524,864 10,641,504 8,973.090 7,647,464 Intematonal Price Gs. Per LI 1,888 4,957 5,171 5,540 5,540 5,355 5,078 5,540 Inputs Total Value M Intermational Prices 1,960,395 6,071,837 4.524.469 8,102,493 8,794,888 9,825,950 8,285.402 7.031.370 Insecticidie Contacto Input's Use Per LT Per MT of Output 0.8 0.8 0.5 05 0.5 0.5 02 0.2 Inputs's Total Use 623 735 315 585 635 734 408 319 Domestic Price Gs. PerLT 5,115 6.115 6,750 8,500 6,500 6,000 8,000 9.000 Inputs Total Value 0 Domestic Prices 3,186,219 4.494,525 2,126,250 4,972,500 4.127,441 4,403,381 3,262,942 2,867,799 Intemabonal Price Gs. PerLT 4,723 5,646 6.233 7,849 6,002 5,540 7,387 8,310 lnpul'sTotalValuef lntemational Prices 2,942,030 4,150,069 1,963.296 4,591,413 3,811,118 4.065.910 3.012,873 2,648.014 Insecticide Sistemico Inputs Use Per LT Per MT of Output 06 0.5 0.5 0 5 0.5 0.5 0 2 0.2 Inputs's Total Use 415 490 350 585 635 734 408 319 Domestc Pnce Gs. Per LT 4,330 5,710 8,800 9,000 9,500 9,500 9,500 10,500 Inpufs Total Value 0 Domestc Prices 1,798,153 2,797,900 3,080,000 5,265,000 6,032,414 6,972,020 3.874 743 3,345,765 Intemational Price Gs. Per LT 3.998 5,272 8,126 8,310 8,772 8.772 8.772 9.695 Input's Total Value § Intemabonal Prices 1,660,344 2,583,472 2,843,952 4,861,496 5,570,096 6,437,691 3,577,787 3,089.349 Gas & Oil Inputs Use Per LT Per MT of Output 31 28 28 28 25 25 25 25 Inputs's Total Use 22,840 26,950 19.250 32,175 34,925 40,364 44,865 35.051 Domestic Price Gs. Per LT 120 120 140 165 190 220 480 480 Inpu's Total Value 0 Domestc Prices 2,740,833 3.234,000 2,695,000 5,308,875 6,635,655 8,880,152 21,535,416 16,824,420 Intemational Price Gs PerLT 111 ill 129 152 175 203 443 443 Inputs Total Value 0 Intemational Pnces 2,530.779 2,986,150 2,488.458 4,902,008 8,127,105 8.199.586 19,884.964 15.535.014 3. NON-PRICE ASSISTANCE Direct Payments 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Credit Subsidies 1,768,400 1.956.013 5.490,970 5,441 075 10.104.377 8,171,883 13,147.193 6,779.808 Tax Eemptions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reseach & Extension 282,584 281,168 289,584 257,628 463.201 615,979 800.483 1,319,877 4 VALUE ADDED Assisted Value Added (Domestic Pnces) 26,182,542 17,051,596 40,404,404 40,386,779 166,501.697 219,325,406 184.117,107 156.454,999 Unassisted ValueAdded (Intemational Pnces) 34,036,562 46,567,750 33.957,367 54,990.560 187.357.826 213,531,139 161.237.694 121,217.204 5 ERA -23.1% -634% 19.0% -26.6% -11 1% 2.2% 142% 29.1% a. One package contains 250 grams of innoculant. Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 I I CHAPTER 2 PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS Overview A summary of the protection indicators for Paraguay is shown in Tables 5 and 6. For a more detailed account of the calculations for each indicator, see the standardized worksheets in the Appendix. Table 5 presents a composite weighted annual average of the four protection indicators. The weights are the total revenue of the commodity (valued at domestic prices) relative to the aggregate value of all commodities included in this study. The general trend is a decline in taxation since the reform program was initiated in 1989, and in 1991 positive protection existed. This trend is evident for all the protection indicators. It is important to observe that this trend exists for both reported exportables and importables. Since the agricultural sector is predominant in Paraguay, and it either exports or is relatively self-sufficient in almost all agricultural commodities, this trend shows that a broad policy was applied to all commodities. Table 6 shows the protection estimates by commodity. In the last three years NPRs have ranged from a high of 37.7% (see cotton in 1991) to a low of -67.9% (see wheat in 1993). The individual NPRs have followed a pattern that mirrors progress in reform. Prior to 1989, the NPRs were generally negative and producers were taxed through a system of multiple exchange rates. Beginning in 1989 the multiple exchange rate system was abolished, and replaced with a system of export taxes. The NPRs-except for that of sugar-showed a movement towards positive protection: In the case of Paraguay, some intervention existed in the input market. However, the subsidies and tariffs applied to the various inputs canceled each other out so the net result was the EPRs were relatively close to the NPRs. From 1984-1988, transfers (as reflected by the PSE) have generally been negative due to the taxation through the multiple exchange rate system. However, the trend (again, with the exception of sugar) reversed after reforms in 1989. After 1989, non-price transfers were not a significant contributor to the incomes of producers, as reflected in the PSE values observed. Evolution and Current State of Trade Policy Paraguay's reform program began in February 1989. At this time, the military government which had lasted 34 years was overthrown, and many interventionist policies towards agriculture were abolished. 17 Before 1989, agriculture policy was centered around production of cotton, soybeans and wheat. The Government (GOP) would fix reference prices for soybeans and cotton, and minimum prices for wheat and sugarcane, based on international prices and cost of production considerations. The problem was that the GOP did not have sufficient funds to buy all the production during periods of depressed prices, and during periods of favorable prices paid the product the reference price instead of the border price. In addition to fixed prices, a two-tier exchange rate existed for exports. Thus, producers were penalized twice: through fixed prices and multiple exchange rates. As a partial offset, the GOP directly and indirectly (through regulation of commercial banks) provides subsidized credit. For example, producers could borrow at 12% annually while inflation was 30%. Beginning in 1987, soybeans were allowed to trade at a free market price, at a time world prices were low. After the change in government in 1989, market reforms were implemented for export products. The exchange rate was devalued and allowed to float. The two-tier exchange rate for exports was eliminated and all price fixing was abolished. Combined, these actions removed the considerable anti-export bias that prevailed before 1989. TABLE 5. Paraguay 's Weighted Average Protection Indicators 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 COMPOSITE Wt. Ave. NPR -28.1 -45.6 -11.8 -18.9 -8.0 1.2 2.4 22.2 Wt. Ave. EPR -38.5 -56.9 -15.2 -32.3 -12.6 -1.5 -1.3 9.4 Wt. Ave. PSE -32.6 -71.3 -5.8 -15.9 -6.4 -13.9 -9.7 8.6 Wt. Ave. ERA -31.0 -48.6 -0.6 -19.9 -4.5 3.0 6.0 48.7 EXPORTABLE Wt. Ave. NPR -26.8 -45.8 -12.1 -16.6 -7.5 6.7 6.1 22.2 Wt. Ave. EPR -36.2 -56.1 -14.1 -28.5 -10.8 5.7 5.6 24.8 Wt. Ave. PSE -30.2 -72.0 -6.3 -11.9 -6.4 -5.3 -5.5 8.1 Wt. Ave. ERA -29.2 -48.2 -0.4 -16.5 -4.2 10.2 12.3 29.5 IMPORTABLE Wt. Ave. NPR -46.5 -43.9 -9.6 -36.6 -15.2 -51.9 -40.1 21.6 Wt. Ave. EPR -70.5 -66.6 -23.2 -60.7 -36.4 -71.6 -80.7 -219.4 Wt. Ave. PSE -67.2 -63.0 -2.2 -46.4 -6.4 -96.6 -58.8 15.1 Wt. Ave. ERA -56.0 -54.0 -2.5 -46.1 -9.5 -66.7 -67.1 334.4 Source: Surveillance Project, LATAD, 1995 18 In 1992, the GOP implemented a sweeping import tariff reform. The measure included a sharp reduction in the level of custom duties and elimination of administrative barriers to promote trade. However, the GOP continued to ban imports of a number of products of agricultural origin. During 1993-94, Paraguay had no discriminatory export or import policies in place, and no administrative barriers or quotas. TABLE 6. Paraguay: Summary of Protection Indicatorsa 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 EXPORTABLES Cofton NPR -31.1 -46.5 -24.8 -8.0 8.4 27.3 17.5 37.7 N.A. 27.8 EPR -31.7 -47.5 -26.1 -8.9 8.4 28.3 18.0 39.7 N.A. 30.1 PSE -40.6 -82.6 -24.6 -0.7 13.4 24.9 18.8 29.3 N.A. N.A. ERA -28.7 -45.7 -19.5 -0.7 15.6 33.5 23.6 44.0 N.A. N.A. Soybeans NPR -19.4 -45.0 3.7 -19.9 -12.6 -0.2 6.4 17.5 N.A. 17.0 EPR -31.2 -73.3 1.3 -41.7 -17.6 -2.2 5.5 22.8 N.A. 23.5 PSE -19.5 -69.6 11.2 -18.9 -9.9 1.5 8.1 14.5 N.A. N.A. ERA -23.1 -63.4 19.0 -26.6 -11.1 2.2 14.2 29.1 N.A. N.A. Sugar NPR -57.5 -44.5 -50.9 -29.5 -56.7 -70.7 -72.6 -63.0 N.A. -67.9 EPR -120.0 -5.3 -53.9 -31.8 -65.1 -76.9 -77.7 -69.0 N.A. -77.9 PSE -37.6 11.0 -23.7 -16.2 -93.8 -232.2 -255.1 -165.0 N.A. N.A. ERA -89.1 45.6 -25.7 -21.3 -59.7 -75.6 -75.6 -67.8 N.A. N.A. Wheat NPR -1.1 -1.1 EPR -2.8 -49.0 PSE 1.0 -4.3 ERA 1.7 -15.4 IMPORTABLES Wheat NPR -46.5 -43.9 -9.6 -36.6 -15.2 -51.9 -40.1 21.6 N.A. -13.7 EPR -70.5 -66.6 -23.2 -60.7 -36.4 -71.6 -80.7 -219.4 N.A. -40.3 PSE -67.2 -63.0 -2.2 -46.4 -6.4 -96.6 -58.8 15.1 N.A. N.A. ERA -56.0 -54.0 -2.5 -46.1 -9.5 -66.7 -67.1 334.4 N.A. N.A. a. Evaluation at the point of price determination. In most cases, unless otherwise noted, it corresponds to the processing center (mills for grain, auction center for beef, etc.). Source: Surveillanoe Project, LATAD, 1995 19 Who Received the Hidden Income Transfer? Which agricultural activities were taxed and which subsidized by the trade regime in place during the time period of the study? Previous measures on the EPR and PSE reported the transfer per unit of output. Here we show both the absolute monetary value of the transfer for each commodity and the transfer per unit (see table below). Figures la, lb and table 7 show the total transfers for all commodities. Both graphs point to a general decline in export taxes since 1989, and a some positive protection in 1991. Table 7 shows the actual amount of the transfer by program and commodity. Examination of figures 1 a and I b. and table 7 reveals that cotton and soybean producers have paid a proportionally larger share of the taxation previous to 1989 compared to the other products. For example, in 1985 (the peak year for total transfers within the study), cotton and soybean producers had negative transfers of US$82.2 million and US$47.3 million, respectively. These two sub-sectors made up 95% of the total transfers that year. By 1991, however, the policies had changed and the two sub-sectors were receiving positive transfers of US$82.6 million and US$26.5 million. The burden of taxation now fell on wheat and sugar, the only two commodities taxed after reforms were implemented. Table 7 also examines the specific programs through which transfers occurred. The majority of the transfers came from taxation within the pricing mechanism of each commodity. During its highest year. 1985. over US$135.2 million was transferred from producers of the four commodities studied to the rest of the economy. This figure has decreased rapidly since then, and in 1991, a subsidy of US$46.2 million was paid. Other transfers included credit assistance and research and extension. Various transfer measures by commodity are presented in the table below. The first line shows the domestic price per MT of the commodity. These figures are included for comparative purposes. The second line is the most important. This row shows the actual transfer per MT of the commodity produced (in US dollars). When compared to the domestic price, one can see how important, in monetary terms, the transfer is to the producer. The third line shows the PSE expressed as a percentage of production valued at domestic prices. This line is included for comparative purposes. Soybeans, for example, had an average domestic price per MT of US$129 for 1990-1991. The transfer received per ton of soybeans was US$15; in this case, a small subsidy is paid to the producers. See appendix tables 2c-5c for more details concerning the composition of the PSEs for all the individual commodities in their local currencies. 1990-91 Average Price and PSE Measures (Current US Dollars) |__ I Cotton Soybean Sugar Wheat Domestic Price (MT) $414 $129 $15 $109 PSE Per MT $101 $15 -$31 -$22 PSE(%) 24% 11% -210% -22% Note: PSE (%) are calculatedfrom appendix tables 2c-5c, and are based on total transfers and value of production. The results cannot be duplicated using information provided in this table. 20 Figure Ia. Paraguay's Agricultural Exportables. Income Transfers Due to Price and Non-Price Intervention, 1984-1991 150 100- U Sugar 1 Soybeans C0 Cotton 50 K)~~~C - *0~~~~~5 -150 - - 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 Figure 1b. Paraguay's Agricultural Importables. Income Transfers Due to Price and Non-Price Interventions, 1984-1991 10 -10- -20- C/) -30- V Wheat -40- -50 / __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 Source: Surveillance Project, LATAD, 1995 TABLE 7. Paraguay's Agricultural Income Transfers (Expressed in Current US$ Millions) Total Assistance Across All Commodities (By Program) 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 Market Price Support (102.1) (157.2) (30.4) (55.5) (61.1) (89.1) (77.0) 40.4 Input Policies 11.5 13.2 2.6 3.2 5.3 0.3 (9.1) (11.3) Credit Assistance 11.0 7.6 17.7 16.6 26.6 20.3 27.5 14.3 Research & Extension 1.6 1.2 0.9 0.7 1.0 1.4 1.7 2.9 Total Assistance (78.0) (135.2) (9.2) (35.0) (28.2) (67.1) (56.8) 46.2 Total Assistance Across All Commodities (By Commodity) Cotton (42.6) (82.2) (14.9) (0.5) 21.4 58.5 46.2 82.6 Soybeans (20.8) (47.3) 8.6 (19.3) (23.7) 3.6 18.5 26.5 Sugar (4.5) 1.0 (2.4) (3.5) (24.0) (84.5) (93.4) (68.1) Wheat (10. 0) (6.6) (0.5) (11.7) (1.9) (45.4) (26.4) 5.2 Total Assistance (78.0) (135.2) (9.2) (35.0) (28.2) (67.8) (55.0) 46.2 Source: Surveillance Project, LATAD, 1995 Individual Commodities Cotton Cotton, along with soybeans, represents 62.0% of total export value. The country depends on these two commodities to generate foreign exchange. Until 1988, the country exported annually approximately 100,000 MT of cotton (see figure 2a). However, beginning in 1988 export levels doubled to 200,000 MT, and have remained at the higher level. The increase in exports corresponds with the new policy reforms (after ending 34 years of dictatorship) that abolished several of the disincentives to export production including multiple exchange rates. NPRs also reflect the removal of constraints within the subsector. From a low of -46.5% in 1985 (see table 6), NPRs have steadily increased to a high in 1991 of 37.7%. Most of the increase is attributable to the removal of the multiple exchange rate system that has severely taxed agricultural export production. However, it is important to note that positive NPRs from 1989 to 1993 are also due to market structure or distortions in the domestic cotton market, for which there are no clear explanations. The EPRs are generally within 3 percentage points of the NPRs. Two reasons exist for this close association. First, although domestic input prices are slightly above border prices (in most cases), the differences between them are small. Second, the inputs represent a low share of total output value. Thus, the impact of the input market on the protection indicator will be small. Although two non-price programs-credit assistance and research and extension (refer to figure 2c)-exist, price transfers are the most significant portion of total transfers into the subsector. This is confirmed by the close association of the PSEs and the NPRs in recent years, and the small differences between the EPR and ERA. Soybeans Aside from cotton exports, the other major contributor to foreign exchange earnings is the export of soybean. Similarly to cotton, exports of soybeans have increased dramatically since 1988. Prior to 1988, exports averaged 600,000 MT. However, after the abolishment of multiple exchange rates, exports jumped dramatically to a level near 1.5 million MT. In recent years export production has decreased because of poor weather conditions. NPRs are very similar in both direction and magnitude to the cotton NPRs. From a low of - 45% in 1986, the protection indicator has climbed to a high of 17.5% in 1991. The reasons are the same as for cotton. Beginning in 1989, producers no longer suffered the disincentives that stemmed from the multiple exchange rate system that existed for exports. Domestic input costs for soybeans are higher than their corresponding border costs. This combined with the higher input cost share relative to output value, explains the lower EPRs relative 24 to NPRs. For example, the year before the reform program was initiated, 1987, the NPR was - 19.9% whereas the EPR was much lower at -41.7%. This reversed in 1989 as the wedge between domestic and border prices of inputs diminished. By 1991, the difference between the two indicators was less than 3 percentage points. Referring to figure 3c, the pattern of transfers for soybeans is similar to that of cotton. During the early part of the study (1985-1988), large price-based negative transfers existed. Most of these price transfers were caused by the multiple exchange rate system. After reforns were implemented in 1989, these large negative transfers disappeared. Two non-price transfers-credit assistance and research and extensions-existed for soybeans producers. However, the relative magnitude of these programs is small compared to the price-based transfers. For example, in the most recent year, 1991 (see appendix table 3c), price transfers totaled US$27 million whereas non-price transfers totaled US$8 million. Sugar Figure 4a shows that with the exception of 1986 and 1987 Paraguay has been a net exporter of sugar. Export volume has averaged around 10,000 MT annually. Exports had been declining since 1982, but increased again after 1988, when reforms were started. The indicators for sugar have been large and negative throughout the period of the study (the PSE for 1985 is an exception). Transfers out of the sugar subsector have increased since 1988. Transfers for 1984-1988 averaged around -US$7 million, after 1988 annual transfers averaged around -US$82 million. The high taxation seems to come mainly from intervention. The NPRs, EPRs and ERAs have been very similar throughout the study. This indicates that there is very little intervention in the input market and that the impact of non-price interventions is minimal. The PSEs before 1988 were higher (less negative) than the other indicators, while those after 1988 were lower (more negative). This illustrates the importance of the negative price-based transfers after 1988. Wheat Figure 5a outlines the imports and exports of wheat since 1980. In most years the crop was imported, and consequently it was classified as an importable (with the exception of 1989-1990). However, Paraguay is largely self-sufficient. It is important to note that before the reform programs began in 1989, Paraguay was a consistent importer of wheat. However, after the disincentives of the multiple exchange rate were removed, Paraguay became a net exporter. Exports declined in 1991 because of the adverse growing climate during the crop year. NPRs, shown in table 6 and figure 5b, show that wheat tends to be taxed. The NPRs range from a low of -51.9 in 1989 to a high of 21.6 in 1991. Two reasons could explain this. First, as mentioned earlier Paraguay was largely self-sufficient in wheat, and most other agricultural 25 commodities. Therefore, the GOP did not have the incentive to promote production through intervention. Second, agriculture is a major part of the economy and an important source of revenue for the GOP. Thus, the sector as a whole was taxed. The same discriminatory policies that were applied to exportables were applied to the rest of agriculture. Figure 5c exarnine absolute transfers. Transfers average around -US$6 million from 1984- 1988. However, during the period 1989-1990 when wheat was exported, transfers were an average of -US$36 million. By comparing the EPRs with the ERAs (see table 6), the impact of non-price transfers can be measured. For wheat, the. two non-price transfers were credit assistance and research and extension. Wheat's ERAs average approximately 15 percentage points higher than the EPRs. In 1991 wheat has a very large negative EPR (-219.4%). All the other indicators are positive for that year. The negative EPR is caused by a negative value-added when measured at border prices. Thus the EPR for 1991 should be seen as an irregularity. 26 Figure 2a. Import/Exports of Cotton Figure 2b. Protection Indicators Paraguay for Cotton In Paraguay 250,000 60.0. - ___ -j'200,000 1OExports 201992 NotW " 200,000 m | | 20.0 v Available 0 E, ll l l l ll 12 -20.0 150,000 || d) O -2~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0.0- * I~~~~~~~~~~~~a 0 oo l-60.0 -4EA _ - - - - - - - - - - . 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 -0. ----- Sou.re: FAO Trade Yearbook, various year's 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 r Y , Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 Figure 2c. Cotton Producer's Income Figure 2d. Paraguay's Border Transfers in Paraguay Equivalent and Domestic Cotton Price 100- 500 80 o Extension 450 60 * Credit Assistance 4001 *lInput Policies 0 350 .19 o 40 LL 0 Market Support(Tax) 01 300 . Available C- 0 20 250 + U) -80 200 R ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 -100 - ------ Note: Both pnces are measured at the point of competton. Border Equivalent price is what 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 the domestic price would be without intervenbon. Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 Figure 3a. Import/Exports of Soybean Figure 3b. Protection Indicators Paraguay for Soybean In Paraguay 40.0 _ _ _ __ 2,000,000- 1,800,000 20.0 -a 'i 1,600,000 F3imF F1 1992 NotIo c PS ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Available o 1,400,000 * Exports o.o - .0 1,200,000 U) 1, 000,000 II INPR E 600,000- ~ ~ ~ IIII-40.0 -U-N EPR 0 400,000 PSEII 200,000jJ-ER 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 -80.0- - ------- -.---______ Source: PAO Trade Year-book, various years 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Source: FAO Trade Yea,book, various years Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 Figure 3c. Soybean Producer's Income Figure 3d. Paraguay's Border Transfers in Paraguay Equivalent and Domestic Soybean Price 40 ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~200 ---------- - - - -- - 30 - l 180 A 20- " m 160' / 0 140 11992 Not- + co ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Available co-20 U | | || OExtension 60 -UII- Domestic Price -30 U Credit Assistance 40 -I- Border Price Equivalent -40- l * Input Policies 20 . 0 Market Support(Tax) 0 ______________________________________________________ 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 -60 - _ .. _ _ _ . __ . _ -- - - -' Note: Both prces are measured at the point of competition. Border Equivalent price is what the 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 domestic price would be without intervention. Source: Surveillance Project, LATAD, 1995 Source: Surveillance Project, LATAD, 1995 Figure 4a. Import/Exports of Sugar Figure 4b. Protection Indicators Paraguay for Sugar In Paraguay 50.0 _ =_ __ __ . 20,000 18.000 0 Its ' 16000 0_ 14,000 * - . 12,000 -100.0 1992 Not ID 10 ooo , * 0 0 8 __ a Available 8,000 =1 00 --W- EPl E 6,000APS 2 4000 1 R 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 -300.0 ____= __ 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Source: FAO Trade Yearbook, vanous years Source: Surveillance Project, LATAD, 1995 Figure 4c. Sugar Producer's Income Figure 4d. Paraguay's Border Transfers in Paraguay Equivalent and Domestic Sugar Price 20 60 A e 20 ,_ -60 *n50 -p-Domestic Price 0 --Border Price Equivalent Oa -20 S T 40 + M C - -80 -100 H ___ _ _ 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 199130 1992 No 9 18-40 18 1986 1D Available SCrceAsvi/sntaDnce Pe 2 U6 Input Policies 0 Market Support(rax) 10 -100 I Li ~~~~~~~~~~~~11 ~~1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 Note: Both prices are measured at the point of competiton. Border Equivalent price is what the domfestic price wouild be withxxt intervention. Soufce: Surveillarnce Pmject, LA TAD, 1995 Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 Figure 5a. Import/Exports of Wheat Figure 5b. Protection Indicators Paraguay for Wheat In Paraguay 400.0 -- __ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 200,000 __ 180,000 - 300.0 --EPR 160,000 olmports _ 140,000 * x prts 200.0 - PSE -44ERA 120,000 * * 100.0o - 0)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~( 1992 Not I 100,000 2 2 4) 0.0 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Available 0) 80,000 oo----- E 60,000 -100.0 > 40,000n 20,000 -200.0 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 -300.0- Source: FAO Trade Yearbook, various years 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 w _________________________________________________________________ Source: Surveillance Project, LATAD, 1995 Figure 5c. Wheat Producer's Income Figure 5d. Paraguay's Border 10 , Transfers in Paraguay Equivalent and Domestic Wheat Price -U-- Domestic Price 6w.40 1 7 - =1 7 |~1l3~ l 200 -4- Border Price Equivalent C-) . Extension O 1992 Not 6 -30 * Credit Assistance ioo Available U Input Policies tM - Market Support(Tax) 50 -50 t - 0_7.=. . _ . , 0 - --0-- 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 -60 _- __-- _.-. _ .__._ _ . Note: Both pnces are measured at the point of competition. Border Equivalent prce is what the 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 domestic prce would be without intervention. Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 APPENDIX COMMODITY CHARTS AND PROTECTION INDICATOR CALCULATION TABLES The Appendix presents standardized tables which provide detailed information on the calculation of each of the protection indicators for each commodity included in the study. The processed data used in the tables are based on the raw data series provided by the collaborator. Please note that the figures presented in the tables are rounded and that replicating the results using the tables may yield slightly different numbers due to such rounding. Throughout the Handbook, numbers appearing in parentheses denote negative values. 31 TABLE A-2a Standardized Format Nominal Rate of Protection Country: Paragusy Type: Exportable Commodity: Coton Point of Competition: Border 1984 1985 1986 1987 19 8 i 198 1991 1991 1221 1 UNADJUSTED BORDER PRICE Exchange Rate Gs./USs 375.8 531.8 749.8 766.8 888.5 1,057.8 1,228.3 1,324.0 N.A. 1,731.3 Border Price USs FOB/Ton 1,720.0 1,418.0 938.0 1,391.0 1,255.0 1,430.0 1,590.0 1,616.0 N.A. 1,327.0 BorderPrice in Local Currency 646,290.0 754,021.5 703.265.5 1,066.549.3 1,115,067.5 1,512,582.5 1,952.917.5 2,139,584.0 N.A. 2,297,368.8 2. BORDER ADJUSTMENTS Tariffs/Subsidies/Adjustments M.E.R. Tao (a) (272.190.6) (206.850.8) (201,552.8) (150,749.6) (212.408.8) 0.0 0.0 0.0 N.A. (331.8) Exchange Tax 0.O 0.0 0.0 D.D 0.0 (14,E54.5 (17,649.2) (19,454.3) N.A. 0.0 Market Structure 133.6D2.1 (5D.981.9( 1DD,129.D 133,549.5 308,997.6 36D,763.1 372,875.6 655,921.4 N.A. 555,492.6 Bank Expenses (8.613.1) (7,469.4) (7,031.0) (17,593.2) (12.278.2) (48,359.7) (58.242.4) (64,199.2) NA. (12.882.0) Storage/HandlingIL.ss (5.201.6) (6,142.7) (7,658.3) (12,580.8) (15,070.1) (25.648.2) (65,566.1) (73.768.3) N.A. (48,135.0) Border Price Equinalent (with intervention) 493,886.8 482,576.8 587.152.5 1,019.175.1 1,184,308.1 1,784,483.2 2.184.335.3 2,638,083.6 N.A. 2,791,532.6 Border Price Equioalent (without intervention) 632,475.4 740,409.5 688,576.2 1,036.375.2 1,087,719.2 1,438.374.5 1.829.109.0 2,001.616.5 N.A. 2,236,371.8 3 COSTS FROM BORDER TO PROCESSING (WHOLESALE MARKET) Taritts/Subsidies/Adjustments Transportation (2.500.0) (2,743.4) (3,209.3) (5,592.4) (6.337.0) (9,615.8) (11,403.3) (12,000.0) N.A. (15.000.0) Other t,)i tQ Border Price Equioalent after Processing (with intervention) 491,386.8 479,833.4 583,943.2 1.013.582.7 1,177,971.0 1,774,867.4 2.172,932.0 2.626,083.6 N.A. 2,776,532.6 Border Price Equialeot otter Processing (without intervention) 629,975.4 737,666.1 685,366.9 1,030.782.8 1,081,382.2 1,428.758.8 1.817,705.7 1,989,616.5 NA. 2,221,371.8 4 PROCESSING COST (WHOLESALE MARKET) Tariffs/Subsidies(Ad(ustments Market Structure (20,277.5) (21,690.6) (22,767.8) (39,868.3) (39.196.9) (103.829.4) (156,122.81 (174.590.31 NA. (174.590.3) Processing Costs (26.500.0) (48.500.0) (87,000.0) (147,055.0) (207.110.0) (282.930.0) (366,580.0) (379,090.0) N.A. (495.685.0) Marketing Margins IncomeIromCononSeed (25.851.6) (30.160.9) (28,130.6) (42,662.0) (44.602.7) (60,000.0) (70,900.0) (75,000.0) NA. (80.000.0) Other Income (m- Cotton Seed 3,480.0 4,350.0 4,380.0 5,220.0 6,380.0 15,950.0 17,400.0 19,720.0 N.A. 36.830.0 Conversion 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 N.A. 2.9 Border Price EquiaIent before Processing (with intervention) 150.045.2 137,168.7 160,465.7 279,619.1 316,851.5 480,787.8 570,165.2 718,811.1 N.A. 746,020.0 Border Price Equivalent before Processing (wirhout intervention) 205,648.3 235,001.8 203.932.7 299,593.1 296,764.3 395,990.1 500,479.0 557,154.3 N.A. 612,820.4 5 COSTS FROM COLLECTION POINT (FARM) TO PROCESSOR Tariffs/Subsidies/Ad(ustmenrs Transportrtion (24,658.2) (22.542.1) (26,370.7) (45,952.2) (52,070.9) (79.012.0) (93.700.1) (118,128.4) NA. (122,600.0) Other (2.095.9) (1,916.1) (2,241.5) (3,905.9) (4,426.0) (6.716.0) (7,964.5) (10,040.9) NA. (10,421.0) Border Price Equivalent at Coll,crioo Point (with interv-nmio) 123,291.1 112,710.5 131,853.5 229,761.0 260.354.6 395,059.8 468,500.6 590,641.9 N.A. 612,999.0 Border Price Equiv,lent at Collection Point (without inteven6ion) 178,894.2 210,543.6 175,320.5 249,734.9 240.267.4 310,262.1 398,814.4 428.985.0 N.A. 479,799.4 6 DOM Border Wholesale 150,045.2 137,168.7 160,465.7 279,619.1 316,851.5 480,787.8 570,165.2 718.811.1 N A. 746,020.0 CoLlection Point (Farm) 123,291.1 112,710.5 131,853.5 229.761.0 260,354.6 395,059.8 468,500.6 590,641.9 N A. 612,999.0 7 NPR Border Wholesele -27.0% -41.6% -21.3% -6.7% 6.8% 21.4% 13.9% 29.0% N A. 21.7% Collection Point (Farm) 31.1% -46.5% -24.8% -8.0% 8.4% 27.3% 17.5% 37.7% NA. 27.8% a Until 1989, producers mere taoed through a system of multiple exchenger 1984 1985 1926 1987 1988 1989 1299 1991 1992 1993 The toi(owing is the annual exchange rate applied to the commoditY 217 386 535 658 719 1058 1228 1324 NA. 1731 Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 TABLE A-2b Standardized Format Effective Rate of Protection Country: Paraguay Type: Exportable Commodity: Cotton Level: Farm 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 199 1991 192 19 1 OUTPUT Domestic Price Gs. Per MT 123,291.1 112,710.5 131,853.5 229,761.0 260,354.6 395,0596 4686500.6 590,641 9 NA. 612,9990 Quantity 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 10 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Value at Domestic Prices 123,291.1 112,710.5 131,853.5 229,761.0 260,354.6 395.0598 468,500.6 590,641.9 N.A. 612,999.0 Border Price Equivalent Gs. Per MT 178,894.2 210,543.6 175,320.5 249.7349 240,267.4 310,262.1 398,814.4 428,985.0 N A 479,800.0 Quantity 1.0 1.0 1 0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1 0 Value at Border Price Equivalent 178,894 2 210,543.6 175,320.5 249,734 9 240,267.4 310,262.1 398.814.4 428,985.0 N A 479,800.0 2. TRADABLE DIRECT INPUTS Seeds Quantity Kg Per MT of Output 20.0 16.7 167 16.7 15.6 15.6 15.6 16.7 N.A. 6.3 Domestic Price Gs. Per Kg. 70.0 93.0 99.0 132.0 160.0 160.0 300.0 710.0 N.A. 1.0000 Domestic Cost 1,400.0 1,550.0 1,650.0 2,200.0 2,500.0 2,500.0 4,687.5 11,833.3 N A 6.250 0 Border Price Eq Price Gs. Per Kg. 101.6 173.7 131 6 143.5 147 7 125.7 255.4 515.7 N A. 783 0 Border Price Eq. Cost 2,031.4 2,895.4 2.193.9 2,391 3 2,307.1 1,963.4 3,990.3 8,594.6 N.A. 4,893 8 Insectrcide Conmacto Quantity Lt. Per MT of Output 0.8 0.7 0.7 1.0 0.6 0.6 0.6 07 N.A. 0.6 W.) Domestic Price Gs. Per Lt. 1,600.0 3,600.0 4,200.0 10,200 0 12,000.0 12,000.0 18,000.0 18,000.0 N A 25,000.0 Domestic Cost 1.2800 2,400.0 2,800.0 10.200.0 7,500.0 7,500.0 11,250.0 12,000.0 NA. 13,888.9 Border Price Eq. Price Gs. Per LI. 1,477.4 3,324.1 3.878.1 9,418.3 11,080 3 11,080.3 16,620.5 16,620.5 N.A. 25.0000 Border Price Eq. Cost 1,181.9 2,216.1 2,585.4 9,418.3 6,925.2 6,925 2 10,387.8 11,080.3 N.A. 13,888.9 Insecticide Sstemico Quantity Lt. Per MT of Output 0.6 0 5 0.5 0.7 0.5 0 5 0.5 0.5 N.A. 0.6 Domestic Price Gs. Per Lt. 2,400.0 3,350.0 8,000.0 6,500.0 14,000.0 18,000.0 24,000.0 32,0000 N.A 42,400.0 Domestic Cost 1,536.0 1,786 7 4,266.7 4,333.3 7,000.0 9,000.0 12,000.0 17,066.7 N.A. 23,555.6 Border Price Eq. Price Gs. Per LI. 2,216.1 3,093.3 7,386.9 6,001.8 12,927.1 16,620.5 22,160.7 29,547.6 N.A 42,400.0 Border Price Eq. Cost 1,418.3 1,649.7 3,939.7 4,001.2 6,463.5 8,310.2 11,080 3 15,758 7 N.A. 23.555 6 Total Direct Inputs (Domestic Prices) 4,216.0 5,736.7 8,716.7 16,733.3 17,000.0 19,000.0 27,937.5 40,900 0 N.A. 43.694 4 Total Direct Inputs (Border Pricel 4,631.6 6,761 2 8,719.0 15,810.8 15,695.9 17,198 8 25.458 4 35,433.6 N.A 42,338.2 3. TRADABLE INDIRECT INPUTS Quantity Domestic Price Domestic Cost 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Border Price Eq. Price Border Price Eq Cost 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Indirect Inputs (Domestic Pricesl 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 00 0 0 Total Indirect Inputs (Border Price) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4 VALUE ADDED Direct Inputs Only At Domestic Prices 119,075.1 106,973.8 123,136.8 213,027.6 243,354.6 376,059.8 440,563.1 549,741 9 N.A. 569,304.6 At International Prices 174,262.6 203,782.4 166,601.5 233,924.2 224,571.5 293,063.3 373,355.9 393,551.4 N.A. 437,461.8 Direct & Indirect Input At Domestic Prices 119,075.1 106,973.8 123,136.8 213,027.6 243,354.6 376,059.8 440,563.1 549,741.9 N.A. 569.304.6 At International Prices 174,262.6 203,782.4 166,601.5 233,924.2 224,571.5 293,063.3 373,355.9 393,551.4 N A. 437,461.8 5. EPR -31.7% -47.5% -26.1% -8.9% 8.4% 28.3% 18.0% 39.7% N.A 30 1% Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD. 1995 TABLE A-2c STANDARDIZED FORMAT PRODUCER SUBSIDY EQUIVALENT Country: Paraguay Type: Exportable Commodity: Cotton Level: Farm 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Market Value of Output Output (000 Tons) 320 469 343 248 543 630 643 632 N.A. N.A. uJ Price Per Ton (Gs./Ton) 123,291 112,711 131,853 229,761 260,355 395,060 468,501 590,642 N.A. N.A. Total Market Value of Output (Millions) 39,445 52,900 45,250 57,057 141,422 248,975 301,088 373,125 N.A. N.A. Assistance (Millions): Market Price Support (Taxation) (17,789) (45,917) (14,917) (4,960) 10,911 53,441 44,785 102,123 N.A. N.A. Input Policies 133 481 1 (229) (708) (1,135) (1,593) (3,453) N.A. N.A. Credit Assistance 1,370 1,412 3,519 4,606 8,466 9,026 12,651 8,728 N.A. N.A. Research & Extension 267 324 252 192 322 560 872 1,985 N.A. N.A. TotalAssistance (16,019) (43,700) (11,145) (391) 18,992 61,892 56,714 109,383 N.A. N.A. Producer Subsidy Equivalent -40.6% -82.6% -24.6% -0.7% 13.4% 24.9% 18.8% 29.3% N.A. N.A. Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 Table A-2d Standardized Format Effective Rate of Assistance Country: Paraguay Type: Exportable Commodity: Cotton Level: Farm 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 19D 1991 12 1993 1. PRICE RELATED OUTPUT ASSISTANCE Total Output 000 Tons 319.9 469.3 343.2 248.3 543.2 630 2 642 7 631.7 N.A. N A. Domestic Price Gn Per MT 123,291 112,711 131,853 229,761 260,355 395.060 468,501 590,642 N.A. N.A. Total Output Value at Domestic Prices 39,445,000 52,900,000 45,250,000 57,057,000 141,422,000 248.975,000 301,088,000 373,125,000 N.A. N.A. International Price O Gs Per MT 178,894 210.544 175,321 249,735 240,267 310,262 398,814 428,985 N.A. N.A. Total Output Value at International Price 57,234,324 98.817.397 60,167,192 62.017,173 130,510,838 195.533,687 256,303,228 271,001,835 N.A. N.A 2. PRICE RELATED INPUT ASSISTANCE Total Output 000 Tons 320 469 343 248 543 630 643 632 N A. N.A. Seeds Input's Use Per Kg Per MT s1 0,opus 20 17 17 17 16 16 16 17 N.A. N.A. Inputs's Total Use 6,399 7,822 5,720 4,139 8.487 9.847 10,042 10,529 N.A. N.A Domestic Price Gs Per Kg 70 93 99 132 160 160 300 710 NA. N.A. Input's Total Value @ Domestic Prices 447,908 727,483 566,254 546,330 1,357,975 1,575,553 3,012,483 7,475.448 NA. N.A. International Price Gs Per Kg 102 174 132 143 148 126 255 516 N.A. N.A. It,) Input's Total Value @ International Prices 649,910 1,358.941 752,926 593,825 1,253,203 1,237,368 2,564,397 5,429,441 N A. N.A. (S's Insecticide Contacto Input's Use Per LT Per MT ot OrTpUs 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 NA. N.A. Inputs's Total Use 256 313 229 248 339 394 402 421 N.A. N.A Domestic Price Gs Per LT 1.600 3,600 4,200 10.200 12,000 12,000 18,000 18,000 N A. N.A. input's Total Value @ Domestic Prices 409,516 1,126,426 960.915 2,532,986 4,073.925 4.726.658 7,229,959 7,580,736 N.A. N A International Price Gs PerLT 1,477 3,324 3,878 9.418 11,080 11,080 16,620 16,620 N.A N.A. Input's Total Value@ International Prices 378,131 1,040,096 887,272 2,338,861 3,761.704 4.364.411 6,675,862 6,999,756 N A N.A Insecticide Sistemico Input's Use Per LT Per MT of OUspor I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 N.A. N A. Inputs's Total Use 205 250 183 166 272 315 321 337 N.A. N.A. Domestic Price Gs. Per LT 2,400 3.350 8,000 6.500 14,000 18,000 24.000 32,000 N.A. N.A. Input's Total Value Domestic Prices 491,419 838,561 1,464,252 1,076,105 3,802,330 5,671.989 7,711,956 10,781.491 NA. N.A International Price Gs PerLT 2.216 3,093 7.387 6,002 12,927 16,620 22.161 29,548 N.A. N.A Input's Total Value@ International Prices 453,757 774,295 1.352,033 993,634 3,510,923 5.237.294 7,120,920 9,955,209 N.A. N.A 3. NON-PRICE ASSISTANCE Direct Payments 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Credit Subsidies 1,369,680 1.412,181 3,519,274 4,606,310 8,466,451 9.025,830 12.650.763 8,728,213 N.A. N.A. Tax Exemptions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Research & Extension 267,266 324,273 252,164 192,464 322,453 560,301 872,039 1,984,776 N.A. N.A Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 VALUE ADDED Assisted Value Added (Domestic Prices) 39.733.105 51,943,984 46.030,017 57,700,351 140,976.674 246,586,931 296,656,404 358,000,314 N.A. N.A Unassisted Value Added International Prices) 55.752,527 95,644.063 57,174,962 58.090,854 121,985,008 184.694,615 239,942,050 248,617.429 N A. N.A. 5. ERA -28.7% -45.7% 19.5% -0.7% 15.6% 33.5% 23.6% 44.0% N.A. N.A. Source: Surs'eiiiance Project, LA TAD, 1995 TABLE A-3a Standardized Format Nominal Rate of Protection Country: Paraguay Type: Exportable Commodity: Soybeans Point of Competition Border 1964 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1. UNADJUSTED BORDER PRICE Exchange Rate Gs/USS 391.0 6320 706.3 788.9 906.1 1,140.6 1,218.0 1,320.0 N.A. 1,7450 Border Price US$ FOB/Ton 223.3 160.9 143.3 1491 245.4 208.3 1767 167.1 N.A. 186.0 Border Pricein LocalCurrency 87.310.3 101,688.8 101,210.7 117,618.6 222,367.5 237,581.0 215.2206 220.5720 N.A. 324,5700 2. BORDER ADJUSTMENTS TariffsSubsidies/Adjustments M.E.R. Tax (a) (37,570.6) (57,234.3) (30,902.9) (33.440.0) (49,860.0) 00 00 0.0 N.A. 0.0 Exchangetax 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 (11,7241) (9,926.1) (10.075.8) NA. 0.0 Port Charges Bank Expenses (1,418.6) (1.429.2) (878 9) (2,486.2) (2,577.3) (7,737.9) (6,551.2) (6,650.0) N A. (1.793.0) StorgeiHandling/Loss (2,209.4) (2,177.4) (2,160.0) (3,714.6) (4.5163) (10,675.9) (11,7661) (11,9360) N.A. (9,499.0) Border Price Equivalent (wrth interNention) 46,111 6 40,847 9 67,269 0 77,977.8 165.413.9 207,443.1 186,977.2 191,910.1 N.A 313,278.0 BorderPrci Equivalent (vithoutinternvenon) 83,682.3 98,082.2 98.1719 111,4178 215,273.9 219,167.2 196,903.3 201,985.9 N.A. 313,278.0 3 COSTS FROM BORDER TO PROCESSING (WHOLESALE MARKET) Tanffa/Subsidies/Adjustments Transponration (3,128.0) (5.056.0) (5,6503) (6,310.9) (7,249.1) (9.1246) (9.744.0) (10,560.0) N.A. (13,960.0) Other Losses (488.0) (408.0) (688.0) (624.0) (1,336.0) (1,496.0) (1,368.0) (1.512.0) N A (2,384.0) Border Prce Equivaleni after Pmcessing (vith iniewenhion) 42,495.6 35,383.9 60,930 7 71,043.0 196,828 7 196,822.5 175,665.2 179,838.1 N.A. 296.934.0 Oi\ Border Price Equivalent after Pnocessing (wthout internenbon) 80.066.3 92,618.2 91,833.6 104,483.0 206,688.7 208,546.6 185,791 3 189,913.9 N.A 296.934.0 4. PROCESSING COST (WHOLESALE MARKET) Tariffs/Subsidies/Adjustments Market Slnrcture 24,079.4 21,396.1 33,669.3 16,338.5 27.4294 11.4516 19.365.5 35,836.9 N.A. 40,866.0 ProcessingCosts (1,000.0) (1,955.0) (2,1500) (3,531.4) (4,733.1) (7,249.1) (11,405.7) (12,500.0) N A (17,450.0) Markering Margins (1,525.0) (1,275.0) (2,150.0) (1,950.0) (4,1750) (4,6750) (4,275.0) (4,725.0) N.A. (7,450.0) Oilher (3,050.0) (2.550.0) (4,300 0) (3,900.0) (8,350.0) (9,350.0) (8,550.0) (9,450.0) N A. (14,900 0) Conversion 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1 0 1.0 10 1.0 N.A. 1.0 Border Price Equivalent befome Processing (vith intervention) 61,000 0 51,000 0 86,000 0 78,000.0 167,000.0 187,000.0 171,000 0 189,000.0 N.A 298,000 0 Border Pnce Equivaleni before Pmcessing (Withoul intenvention) 74,491.3 86,838.2 83,233.6 95,1015 189,430.6 187.2725 161,5606 163,238.9 N.A. 257,134.0 5 COSTS FROM COLLECTION POINT (FARM) TO PROCESSOR Tariffs/SubsidiestAdjustments Transpartabon (3,910.0) (6,320.0) (7,062.9) (7,888.6) (9,061.4) (11.4057) (12,180.0) (13,2000) NA. (17,450.0) Other (1,037.0) (867.0) (1,4620) (1,3260) (2,839.0) (3,179.0) (2,907.0) (3,213.0) N A. 00 Border Price Equivalent at Collection Point (with intenvention) 56.053.0 43,813.0 77,475.1 68,785.4 155,099.6 172,415.3 155,9130 172,587.0 NA. 280,550.0 Border Price Equivalent at Collection Point (without interven00n) 69,544.3 79,651 2 74,708 7 85,887.0 177,530 2 172,687.8 146,473.6 146,825.9 N A. 239.684 0 6. DOMEST Border Wholesale 61,0000 51,000.0 86,000.0 78,000.0 167,000.0 187,000.0 171.000.0 189,0000 NA 298,006.0 Collection Point (Farm) 56,053.0 43,813.0 77,475.1 60,785.4 155,099.6 172,415.3 155,913.0 172,587.0 N.A. 280,550.0 7 NPR Border Wholesale -18.1% -41.3% 3.3% -18 0% -11 8% .0 1% 5.8% 15.8% N.A. 15 9% Collechon Point (Fam) -19.4% -45.0% 3.7% -19.9% -12.6% -0.2% 6 4% 17.5% NA. 17.0% a. Until 1989, producers vwer taxed thmough a system of multiple exchange rates (M E R ) The folloviang is the annual exchange rate applied lto he commodity 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 223 276 491 565 703 1141 1218 1320 NA 1745 Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 TABLE A-3b Standardized Format Effective Rate of Protection Country: Paraguay Type: Exportable Commodity: Soybean Level: Farm 1984 1i9! 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1291 .192 1993 T OUTPUT Duo-stic Price Gs. Per MT 56,053.0 43,8130 77.475 1 68,785.4 155.099 6 172.415.3 155,913 0 172,587 0 N.A 280,5500 Quantity __ .0 10 t.0 1 0 1.0 10 1.0 10 10 1.0 Valueat uDmetic Prices 58,0530 43.813.0 77,475 1 68,7864 155,099.6 172,415 3 155,913.0 172.587 0 N.A. 280,5500 Snider Pike Equicelent Gs Per MT 69,544.3 79,651 2 74,708.7 85.887.0 177,530 2 172,687.8 146,473.6 146.825 9 N.A. 239,683 0 Quanity 1.0 1 0 1.0 1.0 1 0 1.0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1.0 Value at Brder Price Equi-tlen 69,5443 79.651 2 74,7087 85.887.0 177,530.2 172,6878 146.473.6 146.8259 N.A. 239,6830 2 TRADA8LE DIRECT INPUTS Seeds Quantity Kg Per MT nf Output 36 1 350 32 5 32 5 29.5 27 3 27.3 27 3 N A 27.3 Domen-ic Price Gs per Kg 180 0 180 0 250.0 260.0 500.0 500 0 500.5 850 0 N.A 720 0 oumeetic Cet 6.5000 6,300.0 8,125.0 8,4500 14,772.7 13.636.4 13,636.4 17.727 3 N.A. 19,6364 Beider Price Eq Price s- per Kg 223.3 327.2 241.1 324.6 572 3 500.8 469 7 553 0 N A. 615 1 Border Price Eq. Cet 8,064.5 11,453.3 7,834.9 10,550.9 16.9092 13,6579 12,810.8 15,081 2 N A 16,775.7 Innoculant Quantity kg Per MT of Output (I) 0.6 0 5 0 5 05 0 5 0 5 0.5 0 5 N.A. 0 5 Domestic Price Gs. Per PSg is) 350.0 700.0 750 0 800.0 800 0 800.0 650 0 700 0 N.A. 750 0 DOmestic Cent 194.4 350.0 375 0 400 0 363.6 363.6 2965 318 2 N A 340.9 Burdue Price Eq Prre GO Per Pkg (a) 323 2 646 4 692.5 738 7 738.7 738 7 600 2 646 4 N A 750 0 Snider Pric- Eq C-st 179 5 323.2 346 3 369 3 335 8 335 8 272 8 293 8 N.A. 340.9 Ferilizer Quantity Kg. Per MT of Output 50.0 800 50.0 60.0 54 5 54.5 45 5 45.5 N A 45.5 J Dom-esuc Pike Gs per Kg. 130 0 130.0 120.0 240 0 260 0 260 0 630.0 650 0 N A. 695.0 'nj DumesDtc Cnt 6.500.0 7.800.0 6,000 0 14,400.0 14,181.8 14,181 8 28,636.4 29.545 5 N A. 31.590 9 Border Price Eq Price GO. per Kg. 120.0 120.0 110 8 221.6 240.1 240 1 581.7 600.2 N.A. 695 0 Border Pruce Eq. Cent 6,001.8 7,202 2 5,540.2 13,296 4 13,094.9 13,094.9 26,441.7 27,281.1 N A 31,590.9 Herbicide Quantiy L Per MT of Output 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.1 1 1 0.9 0.9 N A 0 9 Demesse Price Os. Per Lt, 2.045 0 5,368.0 5,600.0 6.000.0 6,000 0 5,800.0 5,500.0 6,000 0 N.A. 10.000 0 Dornestic Cent 2,840.3 8,710 0 7,000.0 7,500.0 8,818 2 6.590.9 5,0000 5.454 5 N.A 9,090 9 Burde Price Eq. Prie Gs Per Li 1,888.3 4,956.6 5.170.8 5,540 2 5,540 2 5,355 5.078 5 5,540 2 N A 10,000.0 Snrder Price Eq. Cent 2,822.6 6,195 8 6,463.5 6,925.2 6,295.6 6,0858 4,616.8 5,036.5 N.A. 9,090.9 Insecocide Contacto Queenmy Lt. Per MT f Ouput 0.8 0.8 0.5 0.5 0 5 0.5 0 2 0.2 N A 0.2 Domesdc Price Gs Per Lt 5,115 0 6,115.0 6,750.0 8,500.0 6,500.0 6,0000 8,000.0 9,000.0 NA. 18,000.0 Domestc Cent 4.262.5 4,586.3 3,037.5 4.250 0 2,954.5 2,727.3 1,818 2 2.045 5 N.A. 4.090 9 Snider P.ce Eq Price Gs. Per Lt. 4,723.0 8,646 4 8,232.7 7,848.6 8,001.8 5,540.2 7 386 9 8.3102 N.A 18,0000 Border Price Eq. Cost 3,935.8 4,234 8 2.804.7 3,924 3 2,728 1 2,518 3 1.678 8 1,888.7 N A 4,090.9 In-ecmcide Sistemco Quant.y _L,. Per MT of Output 0.6 0.8 0 5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0 2 0.2 N.A 0 2 D =meetc Price Gs. Per Lt 4,330.0 5,710.0 8.800.0 9,000.0 9,500 0 9.500.0 9,500 0 10,500.0 N.A 14,0000 Domestc Cost 2,4056 2,855.0 4,400.0 4,5000 4,3182 4,318.2 2,159 1 2,3884 N A 3,181.8 Snider Pkc Eq Price Gs. Per Lt. 3,998 2 5,272.4 8.125 8 8,310.2 8,771.9 8,771.9 8,771.9 9,695.3 N A. 14,000.0 Border Price Eq Cest 2,221.2 2,636.2 4,062.8 4,168.1 3,987.2 3,987.2 1,993.6 2,203.5 N.A. 3.181.8 Gas-il Qoararty Lt. Pm MT of Output 30.6 27.5 27.5 27.5 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 N A 25.0 Domestc Prik Gs. Per Lt. 120.0 120.0 140.0 165.0 190.0 220.0 480.0 480 0 N A 520.0 Domese. Cest 3,666.7 3,300.0 3,850.0 4,537.5 4,750.0 5,500.0 12,0000 12,000.0 N.A. 13,000.0 Border Price Eq. Price Gs. Per Lt. 110.8 110.8 129.3 152.4 175.4 203.1 443.2 443.2 N A. 520.0 Border Price Eq. Cost 3,385.7 3,047.1 3,554.9 4,189.8 4,386.0 5,078.5 11,080.3 11,080.3 NA 13,000.0 Total Drect snpots (Domestic P.e 26,369 4 31,901.3 32,787 5 44,037.8 48,159.1 47.318 2 63,545.5 69,477.3 N.A. 80,931 8 Total Dir-nt sM lSnrdr Pie) 26,411.1 35,092.5 30,607.3 43,411.0 47,736 8 44,758.4 58,894.9 62,865.2 N.A. 78,071.2 4. VALUE ADDED Al Denr Pikes 29,683.6 11,911.8 44,887.8 24,747.9 106,940.5 125,097 1 92,367.5 103.109 7 N.A. 199,618.2 At Inter-aeel Peces 43,133.1 44,558.7 44.101 5 42,476.0 129,7933 127,929.4 87,5787 83.960.8 N.A 181,611.8 8. EPR -31.2% -73.3% 1.3% .41.7% -17 6% -2 2% 5.5% 22.8% N A. 23.5% a. One peck contains 250 grams of ioaut. Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 TABLE A-3c STANDARDIZED FORMAT PRODUCER SUBSIDY EQUIVALENT Country: Paraguay Type: Exportable Commodity: Soybean Level: Farm 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Market Value of Output Output (000 Tons) 748 980 700 1,170 1,397 1,615 1,795 1,402 N.A. N.A. w Price Per Ton (Gs./Ton) 56,053 43,813 77,475 68,785 155,100 172,415 155,913 172,587 N.A. N.A. 00 Total Market Value of Output (Millions) 41,900 42,937 54,233 80,479 216,671 278,377 279,804 241,973 N.A. N.A. Assistance (Millions): Market Price Support (10,085) (35,121) 1,936 (20,009) (31,335) (440) 16,940 36,118 N.A. N.A. Input Policies (117) 2,988 (1,626) (929) (696) (4,252) (8,296) (9,227) N.A. N.A. Credit Assistance 1,768 1,956 5,491 5,441 10,104 8,172 13,147 6,780 N.A. N.A. Research & Extension 283 281 290 258 463 616 800 1,320 N.A. N.A. Total Assistance (8,151) (29,897) 6,091 (15,239) (21,464) 4,096 22,592 34,990 N.A. N.A. ProducerSubsidyEquivalent -19.5% -69.6% 11.2% -18.9% -9.9% 1.5% 8.1% 14.5% N.A. N.A. Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 Table A-3d Standardized Format Effective Rate of Assistance Country: Paraguay Type: Exportable Cormmodity: Soybean Level: Farm 1984 198' 1221 1287 1221 1289 1990 1991 1992 1993 1. PRICE RELATED OUTPUT ASSISTANCE TotalOutput 000To.s 748 980 700 1,170 1,397 1.615 1.795 1,402 N.A. N.A. Dmn.stic Prc- Gs per MT 56,053 43,813 77,475 68,785 155,100 172,415 155,913 1 72,587 N.A. N.A. Total Output Value at Domestc Prices 41,899.618 42,936.740 54,232,600 80,478,951 216.670.999 278,377,065 279.804.276 241,973,015 N.A. N.A. Inte-atIo-t PuINe Gs. per MT 69,544 79,651 74,709 85,887 177,530 172.688 146,474 146,826 N.A N.A Total Output Value.a. artetPat rnatPte 51.984.337 78.058.195 52.296,124 100,487,758 248,008,072 278.817.020 262,864.144 205.855.093 N.A. N.A. 2. PRICE RELATED INPUT ASSISTANCE Tuta1Output ODOTons 748 980 700 1,170 1,397 1,615 1,795 1,402 N.A. N.A. Seeds Input's Use Per Ka Per MT 0f Output 36 35.0 32.5 32.5 29.5 27 3 27 3 27.3 N.A. N.A. Inputs's Total Use 26,993 34,300 22,750 38.025 41,274 44,034 48,944 38,237 N.A. N.A Dom.etoc P'... Gs Pet Kg 180 180.0 250.0 260.0 500.0 500.0 5000 650 0 N.A. N.A. Input's Total VaIue. D-mestoPt.e. 4,858,750 6,174,000 5,687,500 9,886,500 20.637.205 22.016,905 24,472,064 24,854,257 N.A N.A otetnatiuna P,r-e Gs. Per Kg 223 3272 241.1 324.6 572.3 500.8 469.7 5530 N.A N.A Input's TotaValue@VlItet,atiunal Pr-ces 6.028.191 11.224.217 5,484,417 12,344,498 23,621,768 22.051,701 22.990.457 21,144,405 N.A. N A. Fertil:ter Inputs Use Pet Kg Pet MT ut Output SO 60 50 60 55 55 45 45 N A. N.A. Inputs's Total Use 37.375 58,800 35.000 70.200 76,199 88,068 81.574 63.729 N.A. N.A Douestic Price Gs. Pet Kg 130 130 120 240 260 260 630 650 N.A. N.A. Input's Total Value@ D,omest:IPrPces 4,858.750 7,644,000 4.200.000 16.848,000 19.81 1716 22.897,581 51,391,334 41.423,761 N.A N.A tntsuset:onal Price Gs.Pet Kg 120 120 111 222 240 240 582 600 N.A. N.A. Input'sTutal Value1 ttenat-unaI Prioss 4.486.380 7,058,172 3,878,116 15.556,787 18.293.367 21,142,734 47,452,755 38,249,087 N.A N A Innoculant Input's Use Pet Kg Pet MT ot Output IeI 0.6 0 5 0 5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0 5 0.5 N.A N.A Inputs's Total Use 415 490 350 585 635 734 816 637 N.A. N.A. Du-estc Pr-u Os. Pet PlI5 let 350 700 750 800 800 800 650 700 N.A N A. Input's ToIa Value 0 DmeGc Prcs 145.347 343.000 262,500 468,000 507,993 587,117 530.228 446.102 N.A. N.A. Intetoatiooat Puce Gu. Por PKg Ja) 323 646 693 739 739 739 600 646 N A. N.A Wb) Input'sITotal T t Vale lnteInat-uoal Prices 134.208 316.713 242.382 432133 469,061 542,121 489.592 411.913 N.A NA HlbI,cces lnput's Use Pet Lt Pot MT o Outout 1 4 1 3 1.3 1 3 1.1 1.1 0.9 0 9 N.A N A Inputs's Total Use 1.038 1.225 875 1,463 1,587 1,835 1,631 1.275 N A. N.A. -vomestc Prtce Gs. Per Lt 2,045 5,368 5,600 6,000 6,0 5.800 5.500 6.000 N.A. N A Input's Toal Valu Doestc P,ces 2.123.108 6.575,800 4,900.000 8.775,000 9,524,864 10,641,504 8.973,090 7.647.464 N.A. NA. n-tetationat1 Pc Gs. Pet Lt 1,888 4,957 5,171 5,540 5,540 5,355 5,078 5,540 N.A. N.A. Input's Total Value 2 Ontene-one- Proes 1,960.395 6.071.837 4,524,469 8.102.493 8.794.888 9,825,950 8.285,402 7,061.370 N.A N A Insecticide Contacto Input's Use Pet LT Pet MT of Output 0.83 0.75 0.45 O.SO 045 0 45 0 23 0.23 N.A. N.A. Inputs's Total Use 623 735 315 585 635 734 408 319 N A. N A .o.-stioP"i.e Gs Pet LT 5.1 6,115 6,750 8,500 6.500 6,000 8.000 9,000 N.A. N.A. Input's Total ValueP D1nestc Ptc.s 3,186.219 4,494,525 2,126,250 4.972.500 4.127,441 4.403.381 3,262,942 2,667,799 NA. N.A nte.oattonal Plice Gs. Pm LT 4,723 5,646 6,233 7,849 6,.002 5,540 7,387 8.310 N.A N.A Input's Toal Value., PtetaonalPttcee 2,942,030 4.150,069 1,963,296 4,591,413 3.811.118 4,065.910 3.012,873 2.648,014 NA. N.A. tnsecttc:da Srstrinco Input's Use Pet LT Pet MT of Output 0.56 0.50 0.50 050 045 0.45 0 23 0.23 N.A. N.A Inpulse Total Use 415 490 350 585 635 734 408 319 N A N A ODnest., Prtce Gs Pet LT 4,330 5,710 8,800 9,000 9,S00 9.500 9,500 10,500 N.A N.A. puot's Total Value P D-oteett P-..c 1,798,153 2,797,900 3,080,000 5265,000 6,032,414 6,972,020 3,874,743 3,345,785 N A N.A Intetoatronal Price Gs Pet LT 3.998 5,272 8,126 8,310 8,772 8,772 8.772 9,695 N A N A. Input's Total Value@ otetnattonal P-es 1,660,344 2,583,472 2,843,952 4.861.496 5,570.096 6.437,691 3,577,787 3.089,349 N.A NA Gas & 0:1 Input's Use Per LT Pet MT of Output 31 28 28 28 25 25 25 25 N.A. NIA. Inputs's Total Use 22,840 26,950 19,250 32.175 34.925 40.364 44,865 35,051 N A NA Domestic Ps.s Gs. Per LT 120 120 140 165 190 220 480 480 N.A N A Input's Total Value. Do. teetc,Pt.ec 2,740,833 3,234,000 2,695,000 5,308,875 6,635,655 8.880,152 21,535,416 16,824,420 N A N.A notetnatiuna1Ptc. Gs Per LT 111 11 129 152 175 203 443 443 N.A NA Input's Total Value@ 0 Into .ttona1 P.tceu 2,530,779 2,986,150 2,488,458 4,902,008 6N127.105 8,199.586 19.884.964 15,535,014 N.A. N.A. 3 NON-PRICE ASSISTANCE ODact Payment. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cledtt Subsidles 1.768.400 1,956,013 5,490,970 5,441,075 10,104,377 8.171,883 13.147.193 6.779.808 N.A. N.A. Tao E.emputo.s 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 R6seatch P& Eutenslon 282,584 281.168 289.584 257,628 463,201 615,979 800.483 1.319.877 N A N A. Othe, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 VALUE ADDED Ass:.ttd Value Added IDomestir Pr-oesl 26.182.941.9 17,051596 4 40.404,404.3 40.386,779.4 166,501,697.1 218,325,405 9 184,117,107 0 156,454.998 8 N A N A Urass:sted Value Added trterna:o-al Ptcesl 34,036,562.1 46,567,749.7 33,957.366.8 54,990,5596 187,357.8262 213.531,139.1 161.237.693.6 121.217,204.0 N.A. NA 5 ERA -23.1% '63.4% 19.0% -26.6% -11.1% 2 2% 14.2% 29.1% N.A. N.A. a. Oe package contalns 250 glarns of t.nocoWant. Source: Surveillance Project. LA TAD. 1995 TABLE A-4a Standardized Format Nominal Rate of Protection Country. Paraguay Type: Importable Commodity: Sugar Point of Competition: Border 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1 UNADJUSTED BORDER PRICE Exchange Rate C/sGs. 0.1 0.0 22.1 4.8 2.4 462.5 18.1 4.4 N.A. 205.5 BorderPrice SrCrFOBrTon. 387,763.7 987,413.6 2132.3 5,850.5 49,579.3 732.0 27,117.0 76,864.1 N.A. 2,184.0 Border Price in Local Currncy 31t1374 24.092.9 47.218.2 28.1247 119,746.3 338,529.9 490,4791 334.358 9 N.A. 448,8120 2. BORDER ADJUSTMENTS Tanffs/Subsidies/Adjusstrnents Port Charges Storge/Handling/Loss Border Price Equivalent (with interventon) 31,137.4 24,092.9 47,218.2 28,124.7 119,746.3 338,529.9 490,479.1 334,358.9 N.A. 4489812.0 Border Price Equialent (without intervention) 31,137.4 24,092.9 47,218.2 28,124.7 119,746.3 338,529.9 490,479.1 334,358.9 N.A. 448,812.0 3. COSTS FROM BORDER TO PROCESSING (WHOLESALE MARKET) TanffslSubsidieslAdjustments Transportation 900 0 1,000 0 1,000 0 1,000.0 1,500 0 1,500 0 1.600 0 1.800 0 N A. 2.400 0 Other 12,455.0 9,637.2 18.887 3 11,2499 47,8985 135.4120 1968191.8 133.7435 NA. 179,537 0 Border Price Equivalent after Pmcessing (with intervention) 44,492.4 34,730.0 67,105.5 40,374.6 169,1448 475,4418 688,270 8 469.9024 NA. 830,749 0 Border Price Equivalent after Processing (without intervenboon) 44,492.4 34,730.0 67,105 5 40.374.6 169,1448 475,4418 688.2708 469.9024 N.A. 630,749.0 O 4 PROCESSING COST (WHOLESALE MARKET) Tariffs/SubsidieelAcIustrnents (a) (31,7655) (23,702.4) (46,6437) (28,773.0) (115.7315) (348,959.6) (538.402.1) (367,737.2) N.A. (470,468.4) Pmacessing Costs (b) 33,333.3 39,213.7 56,302.8 81,309.1 102,480.0 160,352.8 222,222.2 237,955.6 NA. 246,914.0 Marketing Margins Other QualityAdqustment (12,726.9) (11,027.7) (20,461.8) (11.601.6) (53,413.3) (126,482.2) (149.868.6) (102.165.2) NA (160.235.0) Conversion 10.3 10.0 10.4 10.2 102 10.0 11.1 11.1 NA. 103 Border Price Equivalent before Processing (vith intervenion) 3,240.0 3,930.0 5,400.0 8,000.0 10,000.0 16,000.0 20,000.0 21,416.0 N.A. 24,000 0 Border Price Equivalent before Pmocessing (without intervention) 6,327.6 6,305.5 9 873.6 10,831.0 21,293.1 50,819.2 68,456.2 54,512.3 N.A. 69.720.9 S COSTS FROM COLLECTION POINT (FARM) TO PROCESSOR TarillslSobsidies/Ad)ustments Transportabon (9000) (900.0) (1,0000) (1.1000) (1.200.0) (1.300.0) (1,350.0) (1.6000) NA. (2.000.0) Other oter (1,7% Sales Ta Ley 1003) (55.1) (66 8) (91.8) (13680) (170 0) (272.0) (340.0) (364.1) N.A. (408 0) BorderPrice EquivalentatCollecson Point (wthintervenbon) 2,284.9 2,963.2 4,308.2 6,764.0 8,630.0 14,428.0 18,310.0 19,451.9 N.A. 21.592.0 Border Pre Equivalent atCollection Point (vithout intenvenbon) 5,372.5 5,338.6 8,781.8 9,595.0 19,923.1 49,247.2 66,766.2 52,548.3 N A 67,312.9 6 DOMEST Border Wholesale 3,240.0 3,930.0 5,400.0 8,000.0 10,000.0 16,000.0 20,000.0 21,416.0 N.A. 24,000.0 Collection Point (Fam) 2,284.8 2,963.2 4,308.2 6,764.0 8,630.0 14,428.0 18,310.0 19,451.9 NA. 21.592.0 7 NPR Border Wholesale -48.8% -37.7% -45.3% -26.1% -53.0% -68.5% -70.8% -60 7% N.A. -65.6% Collection Point (Fam) -57.5% -44.5% -50.9% -29.5% -56.7% -70.7% -72.6% -63 0% N.A -67.9% a Indudes price intervenbons and income rom U.S. quota income, and market str 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 The breakdown by category isas follows: Pc Interventon 4.687 (1,573) (17,494) (10,002) (15,040) 706 (5.556) 25.911 N.A. 0 USOuota lnwme (5,243) 0 (10,249) (8,229) (8.433) (21,092) (410) (23.405) NA (11.841) Market Structue (31.188.7) (22.129.8) (18.900.4) (10,542.3) (92.258.5) (328.5729) (532.4362) (370.2432) N A (458,6274) b A cost stmucture for sugar pnoduction inv 1hich sugamcane vweights 50%/ (after taking into account the income from the sale ot byproducts) is assumed. Source: Surveillance Project, LATAD. 1995 TABLE A-4b Standardized Format Effective Rate of Protection Country: Paraguay Type: Exportable Commodity: Sugar Level: Farm 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1. OUTPUT Domestic Price Gs Per MT 2,284.9 2,963.2 4,308.2 6,764 0 8,630 0 14.428 0 18,310 0 19.451 9 N.A. 21,592.0 O.antity 1.0 10 1.0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1.0 Value at Domestic Prces 2,284.9 2,9863.2 4.308.2 6.7640 8,6300 14,4280 18.3100 19,451.9 N.A. 21,5920 Border Price Equivalent Gs. Per MT 5,372.5 6,338.6 8,781.8 9,595 0 19,923 1 49,247 2 66,766.2 52,548 3 N.A 72,145.0 Quantity 1 0 1.0 1.0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1.0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Value at Border Price Equ-oaleer 5,372.5 5,338.6 8,781 8 9,595 0 19,923 1 49.247 2 66,766.2 52,548 3 N A 72,145 0 2 TRADABLE DIRECT INPUTS Seeds Quantity Kg Per MT of O.tpt 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 N A 0.0 Domestic Price Gs Per Kg 5.600 0 5.600.0 5,600.0 6,000 0 11,000.0 11,000.0 11,000.0 20,000 0 N.A 30,000.0 Domnestic Cost 140.0 129.2 129.2 184.6 275.0 275.0 275.0 400.0 N A 600.0 Border Price Eq. Price Gs. Per Kg 17,848.8 13.743.5 14,253.3 10,704.0 28,886.9 39,943 4 42.141 3 58.067 7 N.A. 58,589.0 Border Price Eq. Cost 446.2 317.2 328.9 329 4 722 2 998 6 1.053 5 t,16t.4 N.A. 1,171.8 Fertilizers Quantity Kg Per MT ol Output 2.5 2.3 2.3 2 3 2 7 2 8 2.8 2.3 N.A. 2.5 Domestic Price Gs. Per Kg 600.0 600 0 600.0 900 0 850.0 900.0 900.0 900.0 N.A. 1,150.0 Domestic Cost 1,500 0 1,384.6 1,384.6 2,076.9 2.257 8 2,531 3 2,531.3 2.025.0 N A. 2,875 0 Border Pnce Eq. Price Gs. Per Kg 1,016.9 1,197.7 1,144.7 1.207 9 1,324.4 899.6 831.0 831 0 N A. 115O 0 Border Price Eq Cost 2,542.1 2,764 0 2,641.5 2,787.4 3,517 9 2.530.0 2.337.3 1,869.8 N A 2,875.0 Calcium O.ide Quantity MT Per MT of Output 0.006 0.006 0.006 0 006 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.004 N A 0.004 Domestic Price Gs. Per MT 15,000.0 15,000.0 15.000.0 17,000.0 17,000.0 24,000.0 30,0000 50,000.0 N.A. 50.0000 Domestic Cost 93.8 865 86.5 98.1 79.7 112.5 1406 187.5 N.A. 2000 Border Price Eq Price Gs. Per MT 25,421.5 29,943.3 28.616.3 22,815.6 26,487.7 23,988.2 27,700 8 46,168.1 N.A. 50,000.0 Border Price Eq. Cost 158.9 172.7 165.1 131.6 124.2 1124 1298 173.1 NA. 200.0 Herbicide IGesapaxl Quantity Lt Per MT ol Output 0.2 0 1 0.2 0 2 0.3 0.3 03 0.2 N.A. 0.2 Domestic Price Gs. Per Lr 3,500.0 3,500.0 4,000.0 4,000.0 3,800.0 3,800.0 4.500 0 8,500.0 N.A. 14,500.0 Domestic Cost 546.9 504 8 692.3 892.3 1,068.8 1.068.8 1,265.6 1,912.5 N.A. 3,262 5 Border Price Eq. Price Gs. Per Li 5,931.7 6.9868 7,631.0 5,368.4 5,920.8 3.798.1 4,155.1 7,848.6 N A 14,500.0 Border Price Eq Cost 926 8 1,007.7 1.320.8 929.1 1,665.2 1,068.2 1,168 6 1,765.9 N.A. 3,262 5 Total Direct Inputs IDomestic Prices) 2.280.6 2.105.2 2,292.7 3,051.9 3,681.3 3,987.5 4,212 5 4,525 0 N.A. 6.937 5 Total Direct Inputs (Border Price) 4,074 1 4,261.6 4.456.3 4,177.5 6,029.5 4,709.3 4,689.3 4,970.2 N A. 7,509 3 3 TRADABLE INDIRECT INPUTS Herbicide iHerbaminal Quantity Lt Per MT of Output 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 1 0.1 N.A. 0.1 Domestic Price Gs. Per Lt 2,100.0 2,100.0 2,100.0 2,220 0 2.920 0 2,920.0 4,500.0 4,500.0 N.A. 8,525.0 Domestic Cost 196.9 181.7 181.7 192.1 205 3 205.3 316.4 253.1 N.A. 479.5 Border Price Eq. Prce Gs. Per Lt 3,559 0 4,192 1 4.006.3 2,9794 4.549 7 2,918.6 4,155.1 4,155.1 N A 8,525 0 Border Price Eq Cost 333.7 362.8 346.7 25 7.8 318.9 205.2 282.2 233 7 N A 479 5 Total Indirect Inputs (Domestic Prices) 196.9 181 7 181 7 192 1 205 3 205 3 316.4 253.1 N.A. 479.5 Total Indirect Inputs (Border Prnces) 333 7 362 8 346.7 257.8 319 9 205 2 292.2 233.7 N.A. 479 5 4. VALUE ADDED Direct Inputs Only At Domestic Prices 4.3 858 0 2.015 5 3.712.1 4,948.8 10.440.5 14,097 5 14,926.9 N.A 14,654 5 Ar Internatlonal Prices 1,298 5 1,077.0 4.325.5 5.417.4 13.893.6 44,537.9 62,076.9 47,578 1 N A 64,635 7 Direct & Indirect loput At Domestic Prices 1192.6) 676.3 1.833.8 3,520.0 4,743.4 10.235 2 13,781 1 14,673 8 N.A. 14,175.0 At International Prices 964 8 714.3 3,978.8 5,159.6 13,573 7 44,332 7 61,784 8 47,344 3 N A 64.156 2 5 EPR 120 0% 5.3% -53 9% -31 8% 65 1% -76 9% .77 7% -69 0% N A -77 9% Source: Surveillance Project. LA TAD, 1995 TABLE A-4c STANDARDIZED FORMAT PRODUCER SUBSIDY EQUIVALENT Country: Paraguay Type: Exportable Commodity: Sugar Level: Farm 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Market Value of Output Output (000 Tons) 2,033 1,864 1,680 2,536 2,691 2,879 2,434 2,800 N.A. N.A. Price Per Ton (Gs./Ton) 2,285 2,963 4,308 6,764 8,630 14,428 18,310 19,452 N.A. N.A. Total Market Value of Output (Millions) 4,645 5,524 7,238 17,154 23,221 41,539 44,575 54,465 N.A. N.A. Assistance (Millions): Market Price Support (6,277) (4,428) (7,516) (7,179) (30,386) (100,246) (117,965) (92,670) N.A. N.A. Input Policies 3,924 4,357 3,912 3,021 6,627 2,078 1,102 1,192 N.A. N.A. Credit Assistance 564 636 1,845 1,319 1,918 1,640 3,031 1,313 N.A. N.A. Research & Extension 41 41 44 57 52 94 127 299 N.A. N.A. Total Assistance (1,747) 607 (1,715) (2,782) (21,789) (96,434) (113,705) (89,865) N.A. N.A. Producer Subsidy Equivalent -37.6% 11.0% -23.7% -16.2% -93.8% -232.2% -255.1% -165.0% N.A. N.A. Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 Table A-4d Standardized Format Effective Rate of Assistance Country: Paraguay Type: Importable Commodity: Sugar Level: Farm 198;4 198!2 1962i 198 inn in 18 19i 199 inn1 1 PRICE RELATED OUTPUT ASSISTANCE Total Output G00Ton" 2,033 1,864 1,680 2,536 2,691 2,879 2.434 2,800 N.A. N.A. Domost. Pric G0..eprMT 2,285 2.963 4,308 6.764 8,630 14,428 18,310 19,452 N.A. N.A. Total Output Vlue at Domestc Pne 4,644,948 5,523,880 7.237.776 17,153,504 23.220,706 41,538,861 44,575,127 54,465,398 N.A. N.A. InernartionalPrice Gs. et MT 5,373 5,3J9 8,782 9,595 19,923 49,247 66,766 52.548 N.A. N.A. Total Output Value a Imernelional Price 10,921,660 9,952,083 14,753,421 24.332.851 53,606,957 141,784.882 162,540.226 147,135,175 N A. N.A. 2 PRICE RELATED INPUT ASSISTANCE Total Output 000 Ton 2,032.9 1,864.2 1,680.0 2.536.0 2.690.7 2,879.0 2.434.5 2,800.0 N.A. N.A. Soads Input. Use Per Ku P. MT ul 0outo 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 N.A. N.A. Inputs's Total Use 51 43 39 78 67 72 61 56 N.A. N.A. Dontee Pri.e Gs.PerKg 5,600 5.600 5,600 6.000 11,000 11,000 11,000 20.000 N.A. N.A. Input'sTotalValue@Domestic.Pries 284,602 240,907 217,108 468,185 739,941 791,737 669.479 1,120.000 N.A. N.A International Pnce Gs. Per Kg 17,849 13,743.5 14,253.3 10,704.0 28,886 9 39,943.4 42,141.3 58,067.7 N.A. N.A Inpl's Total Valhe@ lrnlemnntion Prrc 907.107 591.234 552,591 835,241 1,943,146 2,874,970 2,564,795 3.251,790 N A. N.A. Feniiozets Input's Use Pet Kg Per MT of Output 3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.7 2.8 2.8 2.3 N A. N.A. lapuls' Totl Use 5,082 4,302 3.877 5,852 7,147 8,097 6,847 6,300 N.A. N.A. Domestic Price G,. Pet Kg 600 600.0 600.0 900.0 850.0 900.0 900.0 900.0 N.A. N.A. Input's Total Value@ DotteDtrt Prtcas 3,049,307 2,581,145 2,326,154 5.267,077 6.075,087 7,287,583 6,162,250 5,670,000 N.A. N.A. Ineentrnal Price G.. P.,Kr, 1,017 1,197.7 1,144.7 1,207.9 1,324.4 899.6 831.0 831.0 N.A. N.A. lv.) Input's Total Value @ International Prices 5,167,858 5,152,529 4.437.720 7,068.898 9,465,604 7.283.990 5.689,981 5,235,457 N.A. N.A Calcnum Oxide Input's Use Per MT P.r MT ol Output 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.004 N.A N.A Inputs's Total Use 13 1 1 10 15 13 13 11 11 N.A. N.A Don,etmcPN..e G.. P.rMT 15,000 15,000 15,000 17.000 17,000 24,000 30,000 50,000 N.A. N.A Input's Total Value 0 Domestic Prices 190.582 161,322 145.385 248.723 214.415 323.893 342.347 525.000 N A. N.A Intermat1onal Pne Gs. Per MT 25,421 29,943 28,616 22,816 26,488 23.988 27.701 46,168 N.A. N.A Input's Total Value @ lnernational Pries 322.991 322,033 277,358 333,809 334,080 323,733 316,110 484.765 N.A. N.A Herbicide IGes-pau Input's UsePer LTPP. MT .oOurput 0.16 0.14 0.17 0.17 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.23 N.A. N.A Inputs's Total Use 318 269 291 439 757 810 685 630 N.A. N.A Domesntc Puce Gse Per LT 3,500 3,500 4,000 4,000 3,800 3,800 4.500 8,500 N.A. N.A Input'. Total Valuae D.reetr Puce. 1,111,726 941,042 1,163,077 1,755.692 2.875,681 3.076.979 3,081,125 5.355,000 N.A. N.A Internationl Price Gs. Par LT 5.932 6,987 7.631 5,368 5.921 3,798 4.155 7.849 N.A N.A Inpul's Tolal Value Plmernalmonal Prece 1.684.115 1,878,526 2,218,860 2,356,299 4.480,604 3.075.462 2,844.991 4.944.598 N.A. N.A Herb.cide (Herbaomina) Input'. Use Per LT Per MT of Output 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 7 007 0.06 N.A. N.A Inputss Total Use 191 161 145 219 189 202 171 158 N.A N.A Doeeatr Price G. P.r LT 2,100 2,100 2,100 2.220 2,920 2,920 4,500 4,500 N.A. N.A Input'. Total Value D.omestic Prices 400.221 338.775 305,308 487,205 552,434 591,104 770,281 708.750 N.A. N.A Internatonal Pce Gs. Put LT 3,559 4,192 4.006 2.979 4,550 2.919 4.155 4,155 N.A N.A Inpot' Total Value 0 Inmerntonl P,es 678,281 676,269 582.451 653.873 860,748 590.813 711,248 654,432 N.A. N.A. 3 NON-PRICE ASSISTANCE Dr.et Payymenl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Credit Subsids 564,469 636,348 1,844,854 1,318,838 1,918,333 1,840,284 3,031,450 1.313.498 N.A. N A Ta. Enemptlone 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reacatch .. En1eneon 40,937 41,213 43,640 57,273 52.392 93,981 127,003 298.698 N.A. N.A Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 4 VALUE ADDED Assisted Value Added (Domestic PrIcesl 213,915.1 1,938,231.0 4,969,238.8 10,302,733.9 14,733,874.0 31,201,830.3 36.708.098.6 42.698.843.7 N.A. N.A. Unassted Value Added llmern-t-Ion P,.ce 1,961.308.1 1,331,492.0 6.684.441.1 13.084,7305 36.522.7747 127.635.914.8 150,413,101.2 132,564,1323 N.A. N.A. 5 ERA -89.1% 45.6% 25.7% 21.3% 59.7% -75.6% -75 6% -67.8% N.A. N.A. Source' Surveillance Project. LA TAD, 1995 TABLE A-5a(i) Standardized Format Nominal Rate of Protection Country: Paraguay Type Importable Commodity Wheat Point of Competition Border 1984 1985 1988 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 19_9. 1993 1. UNADJUSTED BORDER PRICE Evtrhnge Rate Gs/USS 411.3 765.7 848.3 8183 9297 1,2510 1.2043 1.3147 N.A 1763.0 BorderPrice USSCIFITon 2098 1316 114.9 139.7 1101 1830 1710 948 NA 1250 Border Price in Local Cueny 86.2788 100.7712 74.5107 114,355.7 102,3732 228.9330 205,941.0 1245927 NA. 220.3750 2. BORDER ADJUSTMENTS Taeffs/Subsidies/Adl.utmen1s ME R. Tax (a) 35,937.9 69.1843 37,734 2 59,6382 58,325.9 0.0 00 00 NA. 0.0 Exchange tan 24.805.2 28,971.7 21,421.8 32 877 3 29.4323 8 5,91832 59.208 0 35.820 4 N A 0 0 Port Charges Tax eemption (Ley 1003) 3.5541 4.0251 3,1710 4,46b.0 4.0771 8.1903 7,44321 407993 NA. 6.8810 Bank Expenses 345.1 403.1 2980 4574 409.5 915.7 8238 4984 N.A 1,378.0 St-rage/Handling-Lnss Borde Price Equivalent (arith intervenbon) 150.921 1 203,3554 137,136.4 221,795.1 194.6180 303,057.3 273.4159 1657108 NA. 228.414,0 Bonerd Price Equ.nalnI (sithout interention) 90,178.0 105.199 4 77.980,4 119.279 6 106,859.8 238,039.1 214.207 8 129.890 4 NA. 228.414 0 3. COSTS FROM BORDER TO PROCESSING (WHOLESALE MARKET) TariffsISubsdiedsAdjustments MarketSSructure (18.197.8) 17,593.4 21.318.4 16,8428 32,1320 (186,7380) (142 855.5) (9.231 2) NA (30.6540) Transprtonrtior Ote r Boder Pne EqivaltentafterProoessingy(wth intrt,enflon) 132,723.3 220,948.8 158.454 8 238.6379 228,750 0 117,119 3 130560.4 158,4796 NA 197,760.0 Border Pice Eqornalent after Processing (without intervenson) 90.1780 105,199 4 77,980.4 119.279 6 106.859 8 238.0391 214,207.8 129,890 4 N A 228E4140 4. PROCESSING COST (WHOLESALE MARKET) TarinffsSbsidies/AdUstrnenst MarketoStr-ctre (83,5196) (160.7842) (87,694.3) (161,8391) (135,5495) 00 0 0 0 NA. 00 Processing Conts Marketng Margins Other Storage 2,050.2 2,506 9 2.348.4 3,199 9 3 800 0 4,8800 5.440.0 6,520.0 N.A 8,240 0 Conversion 1.0 t0 1.0 t0 10 1.0 10 10 10 10 Border Pnce Equivalent beftre Processing (with itervention) 51,253.8 62,671.4 73,708 8 79,998 7 95,000 6 121,999.3 136.000 4 162,999 6 N A 206.000 0 Border PriceEuivalent before Processing (nithifoxinterrentlon) 92,228 2 107,706.2 80,9287 122,479 6 110,6598 242,9190 219,6479 136,410,4 NA. 236.6540 S COSTS FROM COLLECTION POINT (FARM) TO PROCESSOR Tariffs/Subsidies/Adjpstmenns Transportaton (3,296.1) (4,030.3) (4,7401) (5.1446) (6,1093) (7,845.6) (8,746.0) (10,4822) NA (13.4770) Other (8713) (1,0654) (1,253.0) (1 360.0) (1,6150) (2,0740) (2,3120) (2771.0) NA. 00 Border Pnce Equi-alent at Colledion Point (with ntervention) 47,088.5 57,575.7 67,715 7 73,494 1 87,276,3 112,079,7 124 942 4 149,746 3 N A 192 523.0 Border Price Equialent taColleclion Point (wrhoci ivtenrenbiin) 88,0608 102,610.5 74,9356 115,975 0 102,9355 232.9995 208.5899 123,1571 NA. 223,1770 6. DOMESTIC PRICE Sorrier Wholesale 51,253.8 62,671,4 73 709 9 79,998 7 95 000 6 121,999 3 136 000 4 162,999 6 N A 206,000 0 Colledion Point (Farm) 47,086 5 57,575 7 67,715 7 73,494,1 57,276 3 112,079 7 124.942 4 149 746 3 N A. 92,523 0 7 NPR Border Wholesale .44 4% 41% -8 9% .34 7% -14 2% ,49 8% -38 1% 19 5%. N A .130% Collechon Poml (Famm) -46 5% -43.9% -9,6% -36 6% -15 2% -519% -40 1% 21 6% N A. -13 7% a Unil 1989, pnoducers were taoed Ihrough a sysuem xt multiple exchange ralen (M E R ) The ollowgng ithe annual exchange rate appihed the commodity. 1984 1985 1906 1987 19983 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 240 240 320 320 400 1,251 1,204 1 315 N A 1.763 Source: Surveillance Project, LATAD, 1995 TABLE A-5a(ii) Standardized Format Nominal Rate of Protection Country Paraguay Type Exportable Commodity. Wheat Point of Competiion. Border 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1 UNADJUSTED BORDER PRICE Ex.sange Rate GsJUSS 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11251 0 1.204 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 BorderProe USSFOBITon 0.0 00 00 00 00 1413 1058 00 00 00 Border Pnrie in Loi:al Currncy 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 176,808 0 127,385 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 BORDER ADJUSTMENTS Tariffs/Subsidbes(dPustmenits M.E.R To (a) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exchangeta. 00 00 000 00 00 (1,768.1) (1.2739) 00 00 00 Port Charges 00 00 00 00 00 (11,946.1) (8,534 8) 00 00 00 Bank Expenses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (70712) (509 0) 0 0 0 0 o 0 Storage/HandtngLLos. 00 00 0.0 00 00 (2.931 1) (2.251 5) 00 0o0 0 BorderPnceEquivalent(Wdh,ntervenbon) 00 00 00 0.0 00 159,5554 114.8155 00 00 0.0 Border Pnrie Equix nt (v ithouHintbnenbon) 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 161,323 s 1196099.3 0 0 00 00 3. COSTS FROM BORDER To PROCESSING (WHOLESALE MARKET) Tartife,SubsidieAustAIu1ments, Transportenla Other 1/9 Border Pno Equixaeent after Processing (withitei.ventior) 00 00 0.0 00 00 S19.5554 114.8150 00 00 00 Border Pnre Equin,lent tr Prcessng n(vthout inbrsention) 0 0 00 0o 0 00 00 161.323 5 116.089 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 PROCESSING COST (WHOLESALE MARKET) Tft/lStbisfles/Ad,uxtmar¶ Processing Costs Marhebng Margins Other Storage 00 00 00 00 00 0.0 00 00 00 00 Coovemion I_ 10 10 0 1 0 1 0 1.0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Border Prce Equi,alent betoePprocessing (wth nterventon) 00 00 00 00 00 159.555 4 114,8155 00 00 00 Border Prce Eqowaent betoe Processing (wthoutl nlenbon) 0.0 00 00 00 00 161.3230 t16,089 3 00 00 00 5. COSTS FROM COLLECTION POINT (FARM) TO PROCESSOR TariffsSob.diuA* 4usA sbtments Trnsporation 00 00 0.0 00 00 0.0 00 00 0.0 00 Other 00 00 0.0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 Border Pno Eq.unlent at Colction Poant (wth ternention) 0.0 00 00 0.0 00 059,5554 114,8910 00 00 00 Border Pxce Eqoiueent at Collecbon Point (athoot itrvention) 0.0 00 0 0 0.0 0 0 161,323.5 161,089 3 0 0 0.0 0 0 9 DOMEST Border Wholesale 00 00 00 00 00 00 0.0 00 00 00 Collecbon Point (Fanm) 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 00 00 7 NPR Border Wholesal -1 1% t (1% Collection Point (Fame) -1 1%° 1M% * Unbl 1989, producers wre taxed through e system of mltple exchange rtes (M E R ) The foilowing is the annual exchange rat applied to the commodity 1994 1985 1986 1897 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 240 240 320 320 400 1251 1204 1315 N A 1763 Source: Surveillance Project, LATAD, 1995 TABLE A-5b (i) Standardized Format Effective Rate of Protection Country: Paraguay Type: Importable Commodity: Wheat Level: Farm 1984 198 12 19877 198R I983 1990 1991 19 1299 1. OUTPUT D-mertic Puire Gs. Pr MT 47.086.6 57,575.7 67,715.7 73.494.1 87.276.3 112,079.7 124.942.4 149,746.3 N.A. 192,523.0 Cull-lty 1.0 1.0 1.0 ____ ___1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Value at Doersrtic Pr es 47,096.5 57,575.7 67.715.7 73,494.1 87,276.3 112,079.7 124,942.4 149,746.3 N.A. 192,523.0 Barder Price Equvalent Gs Per MT 88,060.a 1025610.5 74.935.6 115,975.0 102,935.5 232,999.5 206,559.9 123,157.1 N.A. 223,177.0 Qua-tity 1.0 1.0 1.0 1 0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.6 10 Value at Bplder Prue EquIvale-1 88.060.8 102,610.5 74,935.6 115,975.0 102,935.5 232,999.5 208,589.9 123,157.1 N.A. 223,177.0 2 TRADABLE DIRECT INPUTS Seeds Qoantri Kg Per MT ol Output 66.7 66.7 66.7 62.5 62.5 55.6 55.6 556 N.A. 55.6 Domestic Price G. Per Kg 100.0 106.0 120.0 1500 165.0 200.0 260.0 350.0 NA. 450.0 Danresic Curl 6,666.7 7,066.7 9,000.0 9,375.0 10.312 5 11,111.1 15,555.6 19,444.4 N.A. 25,000.0 SPider Pfice Eq Price Ge Per Kg 204.7 207.7 154 0 263.3 223.8 451 2 517.0 349.6 A.6 564.9 Spider Price Eq. Curl 13,649.0 13,645.0 10,269.0 16,4534~ 13,98892 25,065.4 265,723.3 19,433.7 6.6. 32,496.1 Ferriliqers Quaity Kg Per MT of 0upur 106 7 106.7 106.7 100.0 100.0 86.9 66.9 96.9 N.A. SS 9 Dprre-ic Price Or. Per Kg 71.1 73.6 76.9 96.3 190.6 330.9 416.4 673.4 N.A 706.4 D-r rrtil Curl 7,583.3 7,666.7 6.416.7 9.625.0 18.062 5 29,416.7 37,194.4 59,861 1 NA. 62,97 .4 Bpide,r-Pc Eq Price Or. Per Ku 65.6 69 I 72.9 66.9 165.9 305.6 366.4 621.6 NA. 706.4 13rder Price Eq. Curt 7,002.2 7,263.6 7.771.6 8,867.3 16,676.2 27,162.2 34.343,9 55,273. N.A. 62,972.4 F uvuicide 1anlel'e Q-uantity Lr Per MT at Ourput 1.0 1.0 1 0 0 9 0.9 0.8 0 8 0.8 N5A 0 8 Dumesric Price GO. Per Lt 7,000.0 10,500.0 12,500.0 14,000.0 15,270.0 16,500.0 30,500.0 36.500 0 NA. 92,000.0 Domri Curl. 7,000.0 10,500.0 12,51000 13.125 0 14.3115,6 13,700.0 25,416.7 30,4106.7 6.6 35,000.0 Barde Price Eq Price GO. Per LI 6,463 5 9 695 3 11 542.0 12,92 7.1 14,099.7 1,2 35.5 29,162.5 323702 NA. 62,000.0 F-ii. Barder Pine Sq. Cur 6,463.5 9,695.3 11.542,0 12.119,1 13,210.5 12,696 2 23,069.6 26,065.6 N A 35,000.0 is ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Fungicide ON oDitha-el Quanfiry Kg Par MT f 0Iutcur 1.7 1.7 1 7 1.0 1.6 1 4 1.4 1.6 NA. 1.4 D. rerlc Pric Or. Per Kq 1,440.0 1,850.0 2,200.0 3,50000 3,610.0 2,500.0 5,200 0 6,000.0 5.6 5,500.00 Dumeetic CcGr 2,400.0 3,083.3 3.6667 5,4668 8 5,953.1 3,472.2 7,222.2 8 333.3 N A 11,805.6 SprPric Eq Prce .r Per Eq 1,329.6 1,709.2 2,031.4 3,231.6 3,516.0 2,306.4 0,801 5 5,540.2 5.6. 9.500 0 Brde ce qCr 2,216.1 2,847.0 3,365.7 5,049.6 5,496.9 3,206 1 6,666.7 7,694.7 5.6 11.6058 Total Diiect Inpals Ioumesric Pricerl 23,650.0 28,516 7 32.583.3 37,593,6 48,643.8 57,750.0 85.388.9 118,055.5 N6A 134.778 0 lure: Direcr IvBurt Sirder Price: 29.329 8 33,651.1 32,968 3 42.509,5 49.361.9 66,129.9 93,204.7 110.487 4 N.A. 142.274 1 3 TRADABLE INDIRECT INPUTS Inreclilc da Ccvracrv Qua-tity LI Per MT vf Ourpur 0.7 0.7 0 3 0 3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 N A 0 2 Domerric Price Gs. Per Lt 3,000.0 3,600.0 7.500.0 9,600.0 7,200.0 7.900.0 14,800.0 18,000.0 N A. 18,000 0 Domestic Curl 2,000 0 2,400 0 2.5000 3.000,0 2,250 0 1,75506 3.298 9 4,000,0 N5 4. 0000 Border Price Eq Price GO Perl 2,770.1 3,324.1 6,925.2 8,664.3 5,646.2 3,294.6 13,685.7 16 620 5 .A6 18,0000 Spider Pric Eq. Cvr 1,646.7 2,216.1 2.30864 2,730.1 2,077.6 1,621.0 3,0366 3,69 3.4 56A. 4.000 0 Sirtemico Quanirsv Lr Per MT uf Ourput 0.7 0 7 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 N5A 0.2 Domectic Price GOr Pei LI 3.500 0 3,350.0 8,000.0 86760.0 9,000.0 10,000.0 18.800 0 21.000 0 5.A 21 000 0 Domestic Cc-l 2,333.3 2.233 3 2,666.7 2.737.5 2,612 5 2,222 2 4,177.6 4,666 7 N A 4,666.7 Boider Price Eq. Piir- 0G. Per LI 3.231 6 3,093.3 7,386.9 6.068 6 6,310.2 9,233.6 17,359.2 19,390.6 5.6 21.000 0 Spider Price Eu, Ct 2,154 5 2.062 2 2,462.3 2,52 7.7 2,597.0 2,051.9 3,857.6 4,3090 N.A. 4,666.7 Ga-uil OQuan-iry Lt Per MT ol Oulput 34.0 34 0 34.0 31.9 31 9 28.3 28.3 26.3 N A. 23.3 Domeric Priu Or. Per Lr 120.0 120.0 140.0 165 0 190.0 220.0 490 0 460.0 _56A 520 0 Dumesric Ccr 4,080 0 4.080.0 4,760.0 5,259 4 6,056 3 6.233.3 13,600.0 13.600 0 N5.. 14,733.3 B Pdi "rceE..Pc Gs Per Li 11'0.6 1106 1 29.~3 152.4 1 75.4 203 I 4432 43256 2. Border Price Eq Ccct 3,767 3 3,767.3 4,395.2 4,856 3 5.592.1 5.755.6 12,557.7 12.557 7 N.A. 14,733 3 Turil nd reurc Iepje ID-meic Pricerl 6,413.3 6,713.3 9,926.7 10,9969 11,116.6 10.211.1 21,0667 22.2667 N.A. 23,4000 Tolt: lodivc Inpulr Bord.e Pircel 7,768.5 ,0645.6 9.165.9 10,154 1 10,256.6 9,428.5 19.452,1 20,560.2 N.A 23,400.0 I, VALUE ADDED Direct luvors Dnil Al Dumerlic Pi-cea 23,436.5 29,059.0 35.132 3 35,900 4 386532.5 54,329.7 39,553 5 31.690 8 NA. 57.745 0 Al --rervari.naI Plicer 56,731.0 68,959.5 41.967.2 73,465.6 53,553,7 164.869 6 115.385,2 12,669 8 N A 80,902 9 D,iect & lnd-iecr Ipul Al Dumasric Prices 15,023.1 20,345.7 25.205 7 24,903 5 27,513.6 44,118.6 18.48668 9,424.1 N A 34,345.0 Al Icrercaliunal Prices 50,962.5 60,913.9 32,601 3 63.311 5 43.267,1 155,441.0 95.933,1 (7 690 41 N.A. 57,502.9 5, EPr 70 0% 66.6% 23 2% 60 71 .3 4% 71.6% .60 7% 219 49% NA. .40 3% Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD. 1995 TABLE A-5b(ii) Standardized Format Effective Rate of Protection Country: Paraguay Type: Euportable Commodity: Wheat Level: Farm 1984 198 '986 1987 198 198, 199 1991 199 1993 I OUTPUT Do.eesitc Prce Gs Per MT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1;9,555.4 114u815 S 0.0 0 0 0 0 Ouarrrrrv ____ _ 1 0 t O tI O I t O O1 1.0 1 0 t a t O Value at Domes-- Prices 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 159,555 4 114,915.5 0.0 00 0 0 Border P-'v Equrcaleor GD. Per MT 0 0 0 0 00 00 0 0 161,323 5 11o,089.3 00 00 0 0 Duarrtrry _______ __ 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 10 1 0 1 0 1 0 V,lueateBrderP-.ceEquialevt 00 0.0 00 00 00 161,3235 11608993 0.0 00 00 2 TRADABLE DIRECT INPUTS Seeds uar.titM Kg Per MT ol Output 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 55 0 55 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 Do-resrc Price Gs Per Kg 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 200 0 2800 0 0 0 0 0 0 Do-.eurcCot 00 00 00 0.0 00 11,111 1 15,555.6 00 00 00 Border Psce Eq Price Gs P.r Kg 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 260.4 223 1 00 0 0 0 0 Border Prce Eq. Cost 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14.464 3 12,301 9 0 0 0 0 0.0 Fertilizers Quantity Kg Per MT of Odur 00 0.0 0 0 0.0 0 0 88.9 8e 9 0 0 0 0 0.0 Domesric P,rce Gs. Per Kg 0.0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 330.9 418.4 0 0 0.0 0 0 Do.rre ccCout 00 0.0 00 00 00 28,416 7 37,104 4 00 00 00 Brde rPuce, Eq Prc Gs. Per Kg 0.0 00 00 0 0 0 0 305.6 306 4 0 0 0.0 0 0 Border Prrce Eq. Cost O O 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 27.162 2 34,343 9 0.0 0 0 0 0 Furgrcrde Ieolael Occ-tMy Lt Per MT f Outpur 0 0 00 00 0 0 0.0 0 8 0 8 0.0 0 0 0 0 Do-etr P-Pce Gs. Per Lt 00 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 06,500 0 30,500.0 0 0 00 00 OreesrioCost 0.0 0.O 0.0 0 0 0 0 13,750 0 25,416 7 0.O 0 0 0 O Borde Prce Eq Pcce Os Per L 00 0.0 00 0.0 00 10.2355 28,192.5 00 00 0.0 Border Proc Eq Cocr 0.0 00 0 0 0.0 0 0 12,696.2 23.468 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 F~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~unajorde DIothanel Oudooty Kg Per MT of Output 0.0 00 0.0 00 00 1.4 1.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 DoeresruPrrce GO Per Kg 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,500 0 5,200 0 0.0 0 0 0.0 Dom-s c Cosr 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 3,472 2 7,222 2 0 0 0.0 0 0 Border Price Eq. Proc Gs Per Kg 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.308 4 4,801 5 0.0 0 0 0.0 Border Puce Eq. Cost 0 0 0 00 0.0 0 0 3,209.1 6.668 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total DOreot bouts IPomesric Prcesf 57,7500 05,398 9 Total DrIedcouts BoBrder Price 57.528 8 76.873 2 Joc c,de Ceeract Quantity LI Per MT of Output 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0.0 0 0 Domestic Prc GO Pe LIt 0.0 00 0.0 00 0.0 7.9000 14.8000 0.0 00 00 DueesElo Cost 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0 0 1,755 6 3,299.0 0 0 0 0 00 Border Po,c Eq. Pore Gs. Pef Li 0.0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 7294 6 13,667 0 0 0 0 0 0 Border Pro- Eq Cost 0 0 0.0 0 0 O.O 0 0 1.621 0 3,036.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 tlecoto ie Sisreorco Quaotrba 1.L Per MT ot Output 00 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0.2 0 0 0 0 0.0 Do -esc Prce Gs. Per Lt 00 00 00 0.0 00 2,2222 4.1778 0.0 0.0 00 DumoC-st 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 493 8 928 4 0.0 0 0 0 0 Brder Prce Eq Price Gs, Per Lt 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 2.051 9 3,07 6 00 0 0 00 Eordsr Pcee Eq. Cost 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 406 0 857 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Gas oil Ducetity Lt Per MT of Output 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 3 28.3 0.0 0 0 0 0 Do-esI PPce Ga. Per Lt .0 00.0 n.0 0 0 220 0 490.0 0 0 0.0 0 0 DeestCCo o 0.0 0o0 0.0 0o0 00 9,233.3 13,E500 00 00 00 Border Pr,oe Eq P Gir Os. Per Lt 00 0.0 00 0 .0 0.0 203 1 443.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Border Price Eq Cost 0.0 0.0 0 0 00 0 0 5,755.6 12.557.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 Totat lodireol bputs iDoitestr lPlol.sl 0.0 0o0 0.0 0o0 0o0 ,42.7 17,8173 0.0 00 00 Tol 1dec0 sipurs Bor8der Pr,cel 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 00 7.8320 16.4518 0 0 00 00 4 VALUE ADDED Dret Mpus ODly A Domestic Prices 0.0 00 00 00 00 101,905.4 29,4209 00 00 00 At leeatioa Pri-s 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0.0 103.7947 39.216 1 0.0 0 0 0.0 Direct & Indirect spur Ar Domestic Pes 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 93.322 7 11,609 3 0.0 0 0 0.0 Ar lorerocriooe P,es 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 95,962 1 22,764 3 00 00 0 0 s EPR -2.% -49 0% Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 TABLE A-5c(i) STANDARDIZED FORMAT PRODUCER SUBSIDY EQUIVALENT Country: Paraguay Type: Importable Commodity: Wheat Level: Farm 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Market Value of Output Output (000 Tons) 130 140 233 280 314 524 432 301 N.A. N.A. Price Per Ton (Gs./Ton) 47,086 57,576 67,716 73,494 87,276 112,080 124,942 149,746 N.A. N.A. Total Market Value of Output (Millions) 6,121 8,061 15,786 20,580 27,371 58,730 54,014 45,020 N.A. N.A. Assistance (Millions): Market Price Support (5,327) (6,305) (1,683) (11,895) (4,911) (63,362) (36,162) 7,994 N.A. N.A. Input Policies 588 539 (431) 652 (436) 4,499 1,864 (3,483) N.A. N.A. Credit Assistance 581 636 1,682 1,636 3,539 1,997 2,376 2,048 N.A. N.A. Research & Extension 41 49 83 63 59 130 153 244 N.A. N. A. Total Assistance (4,116) (5,081) (350) (9,544) (1,749) (56,736) (31,769) 6,803 N.A. N. A. Producer Subsidy Equivalent -67.2% -63.0% -2.2% -46.4% -6.4% -96.6% -58.8% 15.1 % N.A. N.A. Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 TABLE A-5c(ii) STANDARDIZED FORMAT PRODUCER SUBSIDY EQUIVALENT Country: Paraguay Type: Exportable Commodity: Wheat Level: Farm 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Market Value of Output Output (000 Tons) 524 432 Price Per Ton (Gs./Ton) 0 0 0 0 0 159,555 114,815 0 0 0 Total Market Value of Output (Millions) 0 0 0 0 0 83,608 49,636 0 0 0 Assistance (Millions): Market Price Support 0 0 0 0 0 (926) (551) 0 0 0 Input Policies 0 0 0 0 0 (341) (4,092) 0 0 0 Credit Assistance 0 0 0 0 0 1,997 2,376 0 0 0 Research & Extension 0 0 0 0 0 130 153 0 0 0 Total Assistance 0 0 0 0 0 859 (2,113) 0 0 0 Producer Subsidy Equivalent 1.0% -4.3% Source: Surveillance Project, LA TAD, 1995 Table A-5d(i) Standardized Format Effective Rate of Assistance Country: Paraguay Type: Exportable Commodity: Wheat Level: Farm 1 984 1925 1986 1987 19/ 1989 199.0 1991 1292 l99 I PRICE RELATED OUTPUT ASSISTANCE Total Output 000 Tons 130.0 140.0 233.1 280.0 313.6 524.0 432.3 300.6 N.A. N.A. Domastic Prita Gs. Pe MT 47.086 57,576 67,716 73,494 87,276 112,080 124,942 149,746 N.A. NA. Total Output Value at Domasticrics 6,121,242 8,060.600 15.785,878 20.579.610 27.371.497 58.730,116 54,014.472 45,020.481 N.A. N.A. Iotersatisoal Price Gs PFr MT 88,061 102,611 74,936 115,975 102,935 232,999 206,590 123,157 N.A. N.A. Total Output Value at International Price 11.447.905 14.365.474 17,468.977 32,474,977 32,282,b26 122.092,415 90.176,537 37,026.575 N.A. N.A. 2 PRICE RELATED INPUT ASSISTANCE ToTal Output 000 Ton- 130.0 140.0 233.1 280.0 313.6 524 0 432.3 300.6 N.A. N A. Seeds Input's Use Per Kg for MT of Otpul 67 66.7 66.7 62.5 62.5 55.6 55.6 55.6 N.A. N.A. Inputs's Total Use 8.667 9.333 15,541 17,501 19,601 29,111 24.018 16,703 N.A. N.A. D-eeti Price Gs. Per Kg 100 106.00 120.00 150.00 165.00 200.00 280.00 350.00 NA. NA. nputo. Total Value Domestic Prices 866,667 989,333 1.664.960 2.625.159 3.234,196 5.922.258 6,724,900 5,845.875 NA. N.A. Iterati-nal Price Ge. Per K, 205 207.87 154.04 262.25 223.91 451.16 517.02 349.91 N.A. N.A. Input' sTotal Val.a @ international Pries 1.774,242 1.938.295 2.393.918 4,607,224 4.366,962 13,134,319 12,417,512 5,642,646 NA. NA Fertilizers Ioput's Use Per Kg Per MT ut OU.1r 107 106.7 106.7 100.0 100.0 68.9 88.9 88.9 N.A. N.A. Ioputs's Total Use 13.867 14.933 24.866 28,002 31,362 46,578 38,428 26,724 N.A. N.A. Domestic Pric Gs Per Kg 71 74 79 96 181 331 418 673 N.A. N.A. input's Total Value Domestic Prices 985,833 1,101,333 1.962.093 2.695,164 5.664,743 15,414,422 16.079,716 17,996.944 N.A. N.A. IcearcatieNal Price Gs. P., Ko 66 66 73 89 167 306 386 622 N.A. N.A. Ipurs Total Value.l. IneratiPonaliceu 910,280 1.016,928 1,811,721 2,488,609 5.230.603 14.233.076 14,647,383 16,617,677 N.A. NA. Fungicide Benlate loput's Use Per LT PFr MT uf Outpsr 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.6 0.8 0.8 NA. N.A Iput's Total Usa 130 140 233 263 294 437 360 251 NA. N A. Domestic Price Gs. Per LT 7,000 10,500 12.500 14,000 15.270 16,500 30.5D0 36.500 N.A. N.A. lopu's Total Value@ Dumsic Prices 910.000 1,470.000 2,914.000 3.675,223 4,499,652 7.205.041 10.966,006 9,144.619 N.A. N A. Introationel Price Gs. Per LT 6.464 9.695 11,542 12,927 14.100 15,235 26,163 33703 N.A. N.A. O Input's Total Value@ Ioteroat.oal PrIes 840,259 1,357.341 2,890,874 3.393.558 4,145.570 6,652,854 10,145,897 8.443.785 N.A. N.A. Fuogicide Ditlhane IPut's Use Per Kg Per MT of Oucpus 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.56 1.56 1.39 1.39 1.39 N.A. N.A Inputs's Total Use 217 233 389 438 490 728 600 418 N.A. N.A. Domesic Price G.. PFr Kg 1.440 1.850 2,200 3.500 3,810 2.500 5.200 6.000 N.A. NA. Input's Total Value. Domestic Pce 312,000 431,667 654.773 1,531,343 1,867,013 1.819.455 3,122,275 2,505,375 NA. N.A International Pice Gs. Per Ku 1330 1,708 2,031 3.232 3,518 2,308 4,801 5.540 N A. N.A. inpus Total Value @ lot.roatiual PricNs 288.089 398.5684 789,264 1,413,982 1,723,927 1,680,014 2.882.987 2.313,366 N.A. NA. Ivn.cticide Conracto inpul's Use Per LT Pe, MT uf Output 0.67 0.67 0.33 0.31 0.31 0.22 0 22 0.22 NA. N.A. Inputs's Total Use 87 93 78 96 98 116 96 67 N.A. NA. DomesticPrice Gs Per LT 3000 3,600 7,600 9,600 7.200 7.900 14,600 18,000 N.A. N.A. Input's Total Value@ ( Domesti Prices 260.000 338,000 562,800 840.051 705.643 919,916 1.421,836 1,202.580 N.A. N.A. international Price Ge. Per LT 2,000 2.400 2.500 3.000 2,250 1,756 3.289 4.000 N.A. N.A. Input's Total Value @ international Prices 173.333 224.000 194,267 262.516 220,513 204.426 315,964 267,240 N.A. N.A Ines.cicida Sislemico Inputs Use Per LT PFr MT cf o.tpul 0.67 0.67 0.33 0.31 0.31 0.22 0.22 0.22 N.A. NA. loputs's Total Usa 87 93 78 88 98 116 96 67 N. A. NA. Domestic Price Gs. PFo LT 3,5D0 3,350 8,000 8.760 9.000 10,000 18,800 21,000 N.A NIA. Input's Total Value.@ Domest.i Prices 303.333 312.667 621.653 766.547 882,053 1.1864451 1,806,116 1.403.010 N.A. NA. Ivta.nat.ooil Price Gs Per LT 2.333 2,233 2,667 2,738 2.813 2.222 4,178 4.467 N A. N A. Inpu's Total Value loernati-na Pfikes 202,222 208,444 207,218 239,546 275.642 258,747 401.359 311.780 NA. N.A. GOs ol Inpul's Use Per LT For MT ut Ocipci 34 34 34 32 32 28 28 28 N.A. N.A. Inputs's Total Use 4.420 4.760 7,926 8.926 9,997 14.847 12,249 8.518 N.A N A. Domesec Price Gs. Per LT 120 120 140 165 190 220 480 480 N A NA. Inpu's Total Value Domesti Prices 530.4D0 571.200 1.109,651 1,472.714 1,899,355 3.266.285 5.879.484 4.088.772 N.A. NA. ontar.atioval Price Gs Per LT 111 111 129 152 175 203 443 443 N A N A. Inputs Total Value n-ernaial ...Prices 489,751 527,424 1,024.609 1.359.847 1.753,790 3.015.961 5,428,886 3.775,413 NA. NA. 3 NON-PRICE ASSISTANCE Direct Pam-nts 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Credit Subsidies 581,153 635,871 1,682,354 1.635.544 3.539.310 1.996,675 2,375,943 2,048.243 N.A. N A Tax EEerptons 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ResFar.h & Estsosion 41,409 49.359 82,657 43,238 59.198 130.424 153,384 244,092 N.A. N.A Oth., 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 VALUE ADDED Assisted Value Added Domestic Price.d 3,190,903 8 4.277.9863 8 9.117.385.7 10,970,080.5 14,976,415.6 28.229.294.6 15r449,836.2 9,034.025.9 N.A. N. A. Unassisted Value Added lintrnat-onel Pricesl 7.260.040.2 9,301.485.9 9.353,789.2 20.363,223.4 16,545.087.5 84,851,778.8 47,020,895.1 2,079r815 5 N A N A 5 ERA '56.0% '54.0% -2.5% -46.1% -9.5% 886.7% -67.1% 334.4% N.A. N.A. Source: Surveillance Project. LATAD, 1995 fl~~~~~~~~ 0 66 °°°°° °°° °°°°° °° °° °°°°loooooo H o ooo ooo o o oooo o ooo oo oo oo o o oo 0 6oo do r n 0 0o 0000 0000 o000 oOO- 0e00 e"J|oooI oor 8e_NN oos =C o oooo 0,0n 00 tn0|r _ r_ o N Nro e ~O O OO 6000 G00 00000 70 0000000 0 o ° 00R0000 o000 00-0000 _000001 Xbg_Se _o_80 e 000 000002e |-|- °- 00° zo;s~~~~ .o9..0 ... .,00 000 00 . 0000 ...... ...... 0.00.0.0.00000 . . .0 _~~~~ . .. . .. .. . . . . .. . .N- . . . .i . . . .D . . ......... . . . e 1 ° °° o 80 °8 °8 oo oo oo o o o loo o o oo oo o o oo oo o o oo oo oo o oo o °°°°° oo~~~~~~~0 00000 0000 000 000 0000o.oo odd OOo OO ~~~~~~. . . ...... . 2)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ $ CUoo O 0 o 8o 0o 9o 6 o ooo oo oo oo oo °° doo c E 01 °o oo o o ooO oo oO o oo o o ooo o 6o o 0o° 00 coo 000 c _ 00 0 0 0 od . ts sE e! U) . S. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -u . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > . ." . . . _. e CS~~~ ~ =1 j =2 0 ;' 0aC g t ! T 0O 2 _J I_ C - 1 - o e 5 E&H','A' 44Y~,~0~>,,,0~o0 &. ¾ 25 1o -6 E~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~ a 0 E20 1 51 Distributors of gr~~~~CHIKAGREECE rTALY NORWAY DiSt vU tors Of China Frnancal & Economrc Papasobrinou S.A Lrcosa Commrssronana Sarnoni SPA Narvesen Intormation Center SINGAPORE, TAIWAN, Van Dwnien Editons Teidmg W orld Bank Pildishing House 35, Stoernare Str. Via Dutca Di Calabna, lit Book Deparment MYANMAR, BRUNEI Ch. de Lacaez 41 8, Da F9Si DongJe 10682 Athens Casetla Postale 552 PO. Box 6125 Ettarstad Asahigate PMiosNng Asia CH187 Bitmay Publications Beijing Tel (1)364-1826 50125 Flrenze N-06020slo6 Pacir Pie. Ltd Te: (021) 943 2673 Prices and credit terms vary Tel: (1) 3334257 Fax (1) 364-8254 Tel: (55) 645-415 Tel: (22) 57-3300 41 Kallang Pudding Road *04-03 Fax (021) 943 3605 front country to country. Fax (1)401-7365 Fax: (55) 641-257 Fax: (22) 68-1901 Golden Wheel Buimng HONG KONG, MACAO ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Singapore 3493t8TAZAI Consult your local distributor COLOMBIA Asia 2000 Ltd JAMAICA PAKISTAN TM: (65) 74t-5166 OxoidLUnreer5nysPms before placing an order. nrdenlace Ltda Sales & Circulation Deparment tan Randle Pubirsiers Ltd. Mirza Book Agency Fax: (65) 742-9356 Maknaba Street ApadadoAereo 34270 SeabedHouse, und 1101-02 206 Old Hope Road 65, Shahraht-e-uaid-e-Azam e-mail ashgate@asianconnecdcorn PO Box 5299 Bogoi D.E. 22-28 Wyndham Sreet, Central Kngstr 6 PO. Box No 729 Dar es Salaam ALBANA Tel. (1) 285-2798 Hong Kong Tel. 809-927.2085 Lahore 54000 SLOVAK REPUBUC Tel: (51) 29209 Adrion Ltd. Fax: (1)285-2798 Tel. 8522530-1409 Fax: 809-977-0243 Tel: (42)7353601 SlovartGT.G. Ltd Fax (51)46822 Pedt Rexlei Str. Fax. 852 2526-1107 Fax: (42) 7585283 Krupnska 4 Pa. 9, Shk 1, Ap. 4 COTE DVOIRE URL hdtpYhvwwsales1asa2000.com.hk JAPAN PO Box 152 THAILAND Trana Centre d'Eddon eo de Drffusion Eastem Book Serarce Oxford Unoversily Press 852 99 Bratisava 5 Cenral Books Dsrtnbubon Tel (42) 274 19:221 72 Ahtcaines (CEDA) HUNGARY Hongo 3-Chome, 5 Bangalore Town Tel (7) 839472 306 Silom Road Fax (42)27419 04 B.P 541 Foundabon for Market Bunkyo-ku 113 Sharae Faisal Fax (7) 839485 Bangkok Abidjan 04 Plateau Economy Tokyo PO Box 13033 Te (2) 235-5400 ARGENTINA Tel: 225-24-6510 DombovanUt 17-19 Tel. (03) 3818-0861 Karachr-75350 SOUTH AFRICA, BOTSWANA Fax. (2)237-8321 OCon del Libro lnroeacionl Fax 225-25-0567 H-1117 Budapest Fax. (03) 3818-0864 Tel. (21)446307 Forrsmgk Inies: Av. Cordoba 1877 Tel 3612042951 or URL httpJAlwwbekkoameor.p/-svo-ebs Fax. (21) 454-7640 Oxford Unrversty Press TRINIDAD &TOBAGO JAM. 1120 BuenosAhirs CYPRUS 361 204 2948 E-mail: oup0oup.khi.reum.com.pk SouthemAnrica Systemtacs Studies Uno Te: (1)8158156 CenterotAppibedResearch Fax 361 2042953 KENYA P.O.Box1141 #9 WatsStneel Fax: (t) 815-8354 Cyprus Colege Africa Book Service (EA) Ltd. PERU Cape Town 8000 Curepe 6, Dogees Street, Engomi INDIA Ouarar House, Mfangano Street Eddonal Desarrollo SA Tel (21)45-7266 Tnndad, West Indies AUSTRALA, RJl, PAPUANEW GUINEA, PO. Box 2006 Allied Puldishers Lld. P.O. Box 45245 Aparlado 3824 Fax. (21) 45-7265 Tel 809-662-5654 SOLOMON ISLANDS, VANUATU, AND Nicoma 751 Mount Road Nairobi Liara 1 Fax: 809-662-5654 WESTERN SAMOA Tel 244-1730 Madras -600002 Tel: (2)23641 Tel. (14)2853B0 For subsnpboorardors: DA lnformation Servces Fax: 246-2051 Tel: (44) 852-3938 Fax: (2) 330272 Fax (14) 286628 Intemalorioal Subscnption Service UGANDA 648 Whthrorse Road Fax: (44) 852-0649 PO. Box 41095 Gustro Ltd. Mclcham 3132 CZECH REPUBLIC KOREA, REPUBLIC OF PHIUPPINES Craighall Madhoari Building Vctorra Naticnal Intonmation Cenoer INDONESIA Daepon Trading Co. Ltd. Intemational BDoksource Center Inc Johannesburg 2024 PO Box 9697 Tel: (61)392107777 pnrdena, Konvktiska 5 Pi.1ndrraLimned PO.Box34 Suaee720,Cdyand 10 Tl: (11)880-1448 Pkt 16/4JrnpaRd Far (61)392107788 CS-11357Prague1 JalanBorobudura20 Yeoeida ConrdmiiummTower2 Fax: (11)8806248 Kampaba URL hI1pJww.dadrd rcom.au Tel: (2) 2422-9433 PO Box 181 s9oti H.V dela Costa, comer Te/Fax: (41) 254763 Fax: (2) 2422-1484 Jakarta 10320 Tel: (2) 785-1631/4 Valero St. SPAIN AUSTRIA URL: hftpJ/.wwnis.cz/ Tel: (21) 39D-4290 Fax: (2) 784-0315 Makati, Metro Manila Mundi-Prersa Libros S.A. UNIfTED KINGDOM Gerold and Co. Fax: (21) 421-4289 Tel: (2)817-9676 Castello 37 Mcoinfo Ltd. Grdben 31 DEMIARK MALAYSIA Fax: (2) 817-1741 28001 Madnd PO Box 3 A-101l Wien Samfurtdoi-eratur IRAN Uriversty ot Malaya Cooperabve Tel: (1)431-3399 Afton, Hampshire GU34 2PC TM: (1)533-50-14-0 Rostemoes AN 11 Kowkab Putirers Bookshop, Limded POLAND Fax: (1)575-3998 England Fax (1)51247-31-29 DK-1970 Fredenksberg C PO. Box 19575-511 PO. Box 1127 International Publishing Service httpJirwiotsai.es/mprensa Tel: (1420) 8684 Tel- (31-351942 Tehran Jalan Panxti Baru Ul. Piekna 31137 Fax: (1420)89889 BANGLADESH Fax: (31-357822 TM: (21) 258-3723 59700 Kuala Luimpur 0D-577 Warzawa Mund-Prensa Barcenona Micro likaees Deveipmert Fax 98(21)258-3723 Tel: (3)756-5000 Tel: (2) 628-6089 ConselI de Cent, 391 ZAMBIA Asomice Smciety (MIDAS) EGYPT ARAB REPUBUC OF Fax (3) 7554424 Fax: (2) 621-7255 08089 Barcelona Umoersuy Booksop House 5 Road 16 Al Ahram Ketab Sara Co. Pubiishers Tel: (3) 488-3009 Great East Road Campus DharunxKni RInee Al Gaba Sreet Khaled Estamboli Ave., MEXICO PORTUGAL Fax: (3) 487-7659 PO. Box 32379 Dhaka 1209 Caro 6ah Steet INFOTEC Liareaa Portugal Lusaka TM (2(326427 Tel: (2)578603 Kusheh Denaroz No. 8 Aparado Postal 22-60 Rua Do Carmo 70-74 SRI LANKA, THE MALDIVES TM. (1) 213221 Ext. 482 Faer (2)811188 Fax (2)5788833 TMhran 14060 Tlapan, 1200 Loson Lake House Bookshtop TM. 8717819or8716104 Mexico D.F. TM: (1)3474982 PO Box 244 Z3MBABWE BELGEJM The MiddleEast Observer Fax 8862479 Tel: (5)(606-011 Fax: (1) 347-0264 150, Sir ChIdtampalam A Lorgman Zmbabrwe (Pte.)Ltd Jean De Lannoy 41, Shrd Sret E-rrail: katab-sarerineda.net.ii Fax: (5)624-2822 Gardiner Mawatha Toude Road, Ardbenne Av. du RiN 202 Cairo ROMANIA Colombo 2 PO. Box ST125 1060 Bussels Tel: (2)393-9732 RELAND NETHERLANDS Compani DeoLbrani Bucuresti S.A. Tel: (1)32105 Southerton Tel: (2)538-5169 Fax (2)393-9732 GovemmerdSuppioesAgency DeLurdleboonvilnOr-Pubikabes Str. Lipscanino 26, swor3 Fax: (1)432104 Hare Fax: (2)536-0841 Otfig an tSodathair PO. Boe 202 Buadawesl TM. (4)6216617 FINLAND 4-5 Haeourt Road 7480 AE Haakobrgn Tel: (1) 613 9645 SWEDEN Fax. (4) 621670 BRAZL Akateemnenie Kmakauppa Ddbin 2 TM: (53) 574-004 Fax (1) 312 4000 Fntzes Customrer Service PubrcacDes Teawuca r Ine naLs PO. Box 23 TM: (1)461-3111 Far (53) 572-9296 Reganngagaton 12 Lida. FIN-00371 Helsinki Fax: (1)475-2670 RUSSIAN FEDERATION S-10547 Stockholm Fka PeMax Gomide, 209 Tel: (0)12141 NEW ZEALAND Isdatelstvo Tel: (8) 690 90 90 0140 SeO Peaulo, SP. Fax: (0)1214441 ESRAEL EBSCON;Z Ltd. 9a, Kodpachnry Pereulok Fax: (8)21 4777 Tel: (11) 259-644 URL httpJftooke*t culnefti/akal Yazmot Lderatiure Ud. Prweate Mail Bag 99914 Moscow 101831 Ferx (11) 2%8-8 P.O. Bo 56055 New Market Tel: (95)9178749 Wennergren-Williams AB FRANCE Td Amr 61560 Auddakn Far (95) 917 92 59 R O. Box 1305 CANADA World Bark Pubidrarans TM: (3)5285-397 Tel: (9) 524-8119 S-171 25Solna RmodP Pihing Co. Ud. 66 avenuedeiPna Fax: (3)5285-397 Fax: (9)524-8067 SAUDI ARABIA OATAR TMl: (8)705-97-50 1294 AlgRanr ted 75116 PFns Jarir Book Store Fax: (8) 27-5071 OCth O,rter KIB 3W8 Tel: (1)40-6830-56/57 R.O.Y Ineational NIGERIA P.O. Bo 3196 Tel:813-741-43=3 Fax: (1)40-69-30W8 POBox13056 UniversitydPraaUmhed Riyadh11471 SWITZERLAND Fruc 613-741-5439 Tel Aviv 61130 Thrme Crowns Budirng Jericho TM (1) 477-3140 Libiraie Payot GERMANY TM: (3)5461423 Pttaee Mail Bag s095 Fax: (1)477-2940 Service xlntitationne UNO-Verbg Fax: (3) 5461442 tbadnr COtes-dMontanon 30 PoppeldotereAle 55 TM: (2)(41-1356 1002 Lausanne 53115 Bonn Palestnan AuthonlyMidde East Fax: (22)41-2056 Tel. (021-341-3229 Tel: (228) 212940 bIdexlIonto an Services Fax: (021)-341-3235 Far 1228)217492 PO.B 19502 Je_rtem RECENT WORLD BANK TECHNICAL PAPERS (cotitinued) No. 290 Weijenberg, Dagg, Kampen Kalunda, Mailu, Ketema, Navarro, and Abdi Noor, Strengtlheniing National Agricultual Research Systems in Eastern and Central Africa: A Framework for Action No. 291 Valdes and Schaeffer in collaboration with Errazuriz and Francisco, Surveillance of Agricultural Price and Trade Policies: A Handbookfor Chile No. 292 Gorriz, Subramanian, and Simas, Irrigation Manageinent Transfer in Mexico: Process and Progress No. 293 Preker and Feachem, Market Mechanisms and the Health Sector i n Central and Eastern Europe No. 294 Valdes and Schaeffer in collaboration with Sturzenegger and Bebczuk, Surveillance of Agricultural Price and Trade Policies: A Handbookfor Argentina No. 295 Pohl, Jedrzejczak, and Anderson, Creating Capital Markets in Central and Eastern Europe No. 296 Stassen, Small-Scale Biomass Gasifiers-for Heat and Power: A Global Reviewv No. 297 Bulatao, Key Indicatorsfor Family Plannlirng Projects No. 298 Odaga and Heneveld, Girls and Schools in Sub-Saharan Africa: From Analysis to Action No. 299 Tamale, Jones, and Pswarayi-Riddihough, Techniologies Related to Participatory Forestry in Tropical and Subtropical Countries No. 300 Oram and de Haan, Technologiesfor Rainifed Agriculture in Mediterranean Climates: A Review of World Bank Experiences No. 301 Edited by Mohan, Bibliography, of Publications: Technical Departmlent, Africa Region, July 1987 to April 1995 No. 302 Baldry, Calamari, and Yameogo, Environmental Implact Assessment of Settlement and Development in the Upper Leraba Basin No. 303 Heneveld and Craig, Schlools Counlt: World Bank Project Designs and the Quality of Prinary Educationi in Sub-Saharan Africa No. 304 Foley, Plhotovoltaic Applications in Rural Areas of thle Developing World No. 305 Johnson, Educationt andt Training of Accounltantts in Sulb-Salharani Anglophon0e Africa No. 306 Muir and Saba, Improving State Enterprise Performanice: The Role of Initernial and External Incentives No. 307 Narayan, Toward Participatory Research No. 308 Adamson and others, Energy Use, Air Pollution, and Enviroiinmental Policy in Krakowt: Can Economttic Incentives Really Help? No. 309 The World Bank/FOA/UNIDO/lndustrv Fertilizer Working Group, World and Regional Supplyl and Demand Balances for Nitrogen, Phospliate, and Potash, 1993/94-1999/2000 No. 310 Edited by Elder and Cooley, Sustainable Settlement and Development of the Onclhocerciasis Control Programmne Area: Proceedings of a Ministerial Meeting No. 311 Webster, Riopelle and Chidzero, World Bank Lendingfor Small Enterprises 1989-1993 No. 312 Benoit, Project Finance at the World Bank: An Overview of Policies and Instruments No. 313 Kapur, Airport Infrastructure: The Emerging Role of the Private Sector No. 314 Valdes, Schaefferin collaboration with Ramos, Surveillance of Agricultural Price and Tradle Policies: A Handbookfor Ecuador No. 316 Schware and Kimberley, Informationi Teclhniology and National Trade Facilitation: Making the Most of Global Trade No. 317 Schware and Kimberley, Information Technology and National Trade Facilitation: Guide to Best Practice No. 318 Taylor, Boukambou, Dahniya, Ouayogode, Ayling, Abdi Noor, and Toure, Strengtheninlg National Agricultural Research Systems in the Humid and Sub-humiid Zones of West and Central Africa: A Framework for Action No. 320 Srivastava, Lambert and Vietmeyer, Medicinal Plants: An Expanding Role in Developmlent No. 321 Srivastava, Smith, and Forno, Biodiversity and Agriculture: Implicationsfor Conservation an d Development No. 322 Charles M. Peters, The Ecology and Management of Non-Timber Forest Resources No. 323 Edited by Dominique Pannier, Corporate Governance of Public Enterprises in Transitional Economies No. 324 Cabraal, Cosgrove-Davies, and Schaeffer, Best Practicesfor Photovoltaic Household Electrification Programs No. 325 Bacon, Besant-Jones, and Heidarian, Estimating Construction Costs and Schedules: Experience with Power Generation Projects in Developing Countries THE WORLD BANK R A partner in strengthening economies and expanding markets to improve the quality of life for people everywhere, especially the poorest Headquarters European Office Tokyo Office 1818 H Street, N.W. 66, avenue d'Iena Kokusai Building Washington, D.C. 20433, U.S.A. 75116 Paris, France 1-1, Marunouchi 3-chome Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100, Japan Telephone: (202) 477-1234 Telephone: (1) 40.69.30.00 Facsimile: (202) 477-6391 Facsimile: (1) 40.69.30.66 Telephone: (3) 3214-5001 Telex: Mci64145 WORLDBANK Telex: 640651 Facsimile: (3) 3214-3657 MCI 248423 WORLDBANK Telex: 26838 Cable Address: INTBAFRAD WASH3NGTONDC World Wide Web: http://www.worldbank.org E-mail: books@worldbank.org l 36 9 4 9 780821 336946 ISBN 0-8213-3694-0