[ MIC~z;F~¿~a.~TT -69- ·- \ l_j CENi~O CE' COCUMENT ACION 3. CASSAVA PRODUCTIQN, MARKETING AND UTILIZATION Cassava is the principal root crop in the food economies of tropical Latín America and a major calorie staple in the rural areas of the lowland tropics. Although it is indige- nous to Latín America, and has a high yield potential even under marginal conditions, there have been few efforts to promote the crop . Growth in its production has been sluggish compared to many other commodities, and its role in the diet has perhaps marginally declined. Cassava production increased at an annual rate of 1.9% 1961-78, while rice output was rising 3.3%, maize 2.8%, sorghum 12.5 %, poultry 9 . 5%, and beef 2.4%. Similarly, the percent of total calories from cassava in national diets declined in many majar cassava producing countries in the period 1964-66 to 1975-77, among them Brazil, Paraguay, Venezuela and Peru ( 8 ). The analysis of production trends and the demand for foods in the proceeding two chapters forms a useful frame- work for consid~ring both the crop•s potential and for under- standing why cassava has heretofore remained outside the rapid modernizing process that has been taking place in the agricultural sectors of Latín American economies. Even though grains may seem to be threatening to usurp many · traditional cassava markets, it will become evident that the demand for new cassava technology should not be based on the crop•s recent performance, but rather on its potential. -70- lt was shown above in Chapter 1 that the major sources of output growth in Latin American agriculture 1950-70 were increased use of chemical fertilizers and mechanization. More recently it appears that technical change has become a key source of growth in agricultural output. Cassava is and has been a crop of small farmers, generally produce d under adverse conditions (poor soils; without irrigation or chem- ical control of pests and diseases; ofte n in regions inade - quately served by infrastructure). Consequently, it has yet to be mechanized, though a few exceptions show that it could be. Moreover, it has not significantly benefited from the use of chemical fertilizers, nor has there yet been major technical change in its production. Hence, cassava has not shared in the factors that have been the most important in propelling growth in Latín American agri culture over the last two decades . Howeve r , because cassava is a crop produced with labo r i nt e nsive technology by small farmers, it could be of major impor tance for those countries which opt for a strategy which includes intensifying production in the small farm sector in an effort to maintain rural employment and incomes,in order to both alleviate poverty directly as well as rel ie ve pressu r e on the urban sector by s lowing down rural-urban migration . Demand factors hav e also been inauspicious for the prospects of cassava. Cassava is often of r elat i ve ly greatest importance in the diets of the poor who may not • · ~ -71- have obtained sufficiently increased incomes in the recent past to be able to provide a strong demand for cassava. The income elasticity of demand for cassava tends to be fairly low in the upper income quartile, so that income growth for this group does not provide strong incentives to cassava production . Although the income elasticity of demand for traditional cassava products such as farinha de mandioca in Brazil is usually positive, it is often less than that for cereals and animal products. Consequently, cassava producers may not have faced the same vigorous demand as have producers of more dynamically growing commodities like poultry, feed grains, and beef . As discussed in Chapter 2, relatively weak demand for a commodity not only fails to offer producers compelling short term incentives, but it also may fail to induce the demand for research that can lead to cost reducing technological change . Hence, cassava in the recent past has neither benefited from the forces that have permitted augmented production of agricu1tural commodities in Latin America, nor has it enjoyed a brisk demand that encourages both producers in the short run and technical change in the long run. This represents a dilemma for latín American policy makers for two reasons. First,cassava could be a crucial factor in raising the nutritional status of the malnourished because in certain regions it is such an important part of the diet of the poor . -72- Second, it may also be a key part of any strategy aimed at the small farm sector because it is almost always a crop produced by small farmers. There are sorne trends emerging that may facilitate a more positive role for cassava in the future. First, as will be discussed below, it is now clear that cassava has the potential to enter non-traditional markets - as a feed concentrate or as a wheat substitute - where it would doubt- lessly face a more elastic demand than in traditional markets. This could provide ample incentive for small farm producers of cassava. Second, investment in agricultural research on cassava has been on the rise. If such invest- ment leads to cost reducing technical change, then for the first time cassava would participate in one of the factors that have led to agricultural growth for so many other products . This chapter briefly outlines what can reasonably be said about cassava production, marketing, and utilization in Latin America. It will be shown that in arder to achieve an expanded role for cassava in Latín American agriculture, not only is it necessary to improve production technology, but also it is essential to carefully identify potential markets, as well as develop new marketing channels and processing technology for cassava. The need to attain success in this variety of undertakings naturally increases the complexity of technology generation and transfer as research must expand -73- from a concentration on production to encompass utilization and end-market demand. Nonetheless, as the current status of the crop is discussed and the principal research issues identified, it will be seen that the crop does face sorne favorable prospects. 3.1. PRODUCTION AND MARKETING Statistics on cassava are scarce and notoriously un- reliable. The concentration of production on small farms, the dispersion of production, the long production cycle, the variable sowing and harvest period, the lack of any market storage capability, and the highly decentralized marketing system all work against any systematic means of collecting data on cassava production. Combine this with the lack of demand for reliable production data for cassava and the resultsare production statistics that are little more than educated guesses. aggregated toa national level. An attempt was made to collect all primary data on cassava production and consumption and to develop consistent supply and utilization tables. The hard data consisted principally of agricultural censuses, food budget surveys, manufacturing censuses, and sample surveys !/ The results of this reconstruction are presented in Tables 3.1 to 3.3. l/ Sources, consistency checks, and assumptions in the construction of the tables will be discussed in detail in a future expanded version of this chapter. -74- These data depart markedly from official productíon statis- tics as reported in the FAO Production Yearbook (see Appendix A.4 ). Brazil provides an obvious example of the disparity between agricultural census data and official estimates for cassava, but the much more exact estimates for grains (Table 3.4}. For Brazil a partial consistency check was provided by the 1975 national food budget survey and the data for cassava flour production which was also included in the agricultural census. Estimated cassava flour consumption from the food budget survey was 1,887 thousand tons, while the census productíon figure was 1,812 thousand tons, a difference of only 4%. This reconstruction of the supply and utilization data suggests that official estimates of cassava production in Latín America are 100% overestimated, that is twice the level shown in Table 3. 1. The FAO Food Balance Sheets implicitly compensate for this overestimation, in that two- thirds of the difference is accounted for in wastage and on-farm animal feeding, both usually calculated as an assumed residual. For e xample, in the Brazilian case 50 % of production is put in these two categories. Most of the rest of the difference comes in an overestimation of fresh cassava consumption . The revision of the data does not change the status of -75- cassava. It is still a principal cqloric staple in rural Latin America, especially in the lowland tropics. Around 70% of cassava for human consumption is eaten in the rural area. However, since both the production base and average yield levels are much lower than indicated by previous estimates, the potential impact of new technology will be proportionally greater both in terms of anticipated market impact and potential increases in farm production . Cassava, although generally stereotyped as a subsis- tence crop, is in fact a commercial crop, with over 70% of cassava being marketed. The majar portian of cassava retained on farms is,in turn, used as a feed source, prin- cipally for hogs. A prime example is Paraguay (see Table 3.5) where 22 % of energy intake by hogs is derived from cassava . The use of on-farm sources of cassava for hog feeding occurs principally in the small-scale production units. As production units get larger there is a marked switch to feed concentrates . Cassava is generally perceived as a small farmer crop. In Brazil about three-quarters of farmers growing cassava have farms of 20 hectares or less, accounting for about 60 % of the area in cassava (see Table 3.6) ~~. In Ecuador the respective figures are two-thirds and 50 %. Thus, while ~/ Given that cassava is usually produced in more margina l agricultural zones, a farm size of 20 ha . is considered small when potential productivity is considered. -76- small farmers do dominate, cassava production on medium-size farms is far from negligible. The more striking factor concerning the structure of cassava production is that sorne 90% of cassava farmers in both countries grow 2 hectares of cassava or less. There is very little production of cassava in extensions larger than 5 hectares. In contrast, for the case of rice and maize in Brazil, well over 60% of produc- tion comes from extensions of 5 he cta res or more. These data would have lent support to cassava's position as a subsistence crop, if it were not for the data on the high percentage commercialized. Two factors appear to be important in limiting area planted to cassava by farm. First, there has been little move to mechanization of cassava production activities, apart from land preparation. Second, and probably more important, is access to market. While cassava does have a variable harvest period, once harvested it s storage poten- tial is minimal unless processed. Marketing is thus a cri- tical factor in determining flows of cassava off the farm. Without storage, flows off the farm must be staggere d, with an upper limit on these flows being set by the capacity of market channels or process ing units . With lengths of storage in the ground being constrained by optimal timing of crop- ping activities and land availability, the farmer reduces area planted to that which be ca n reasonally expect to market during the harvest period. -77- Around 60% of marketed cassava is eventually processed. Given the demands made on the marketing system, the expec- tation might be that there would be a movement toward reduc- ing assembly costs and assuring supply continuity by forming marketing linkages with large production units . The data would suggest that in general this has not occurred,although the fresh urban market in Colombia is a notable exception. Reasons for this may be the small scale of the processing units, the mechanization constraint, and the unacceptable levels of risk for the large farmers in relation to their other alternatives. If none of these factors are radically changed, there is no reason to suggest that the pattern of production would change as new end-markets are opened, and thus cassava may remain a small farmer crop. land does not appear to be a constraining factor in cassava farming systems, although studies are necessary to determine the extent to which labor is potentially constrain- ing area planted . Access to mar kets thus appears to be a real constraint on farm-level production. Thus, production potential, while obviously related to resource constraints and the productivity of new technology, is in the final analysis a function of demand potential. 3.2. CASSAVA END MAR KErs AND PoTENTIAL DEMAND Cassava is an exceptionally versatile crop in its abi1ity to enter diverse markets. It can be eaten as a fresh vegetable. It can be processed into a variety of -78- forms for human consumption (flour, starch, casabe, farinha de mandioca). Cassava can also be used directly as an animal feed, or in the manufacture of feed concentrates. In Europe millions of tons of dried cassava are used annually in con- centrates. Cassava starch has numerous industrial uses, for example, in te xt iles, glue and paper. Finally, cassava can serve as a feed stock in the production of alcohol, a fuel substitute for gasoline. The demand for cassava in each of these markets is very largely independent of the others. Cassava, therefore, faces essentially five separate mar kets, each with a dif- ferent capacity to absorb cassava; each with a different set of competing commodities; each presenting different prices at which it can enter the market. Hence, to obtain a broad understanding of the aggregate market potential for cassava, it is necessary to have information about the particular demand conditions in each of the separate markets for cassava. Economic studies of the demand for cassava in these various end uses can contribute to the technology develop- ment process by providing information about the prices cassava faces and the quantities which can be moved in dif- ferent markets. Knowledge of the prices at which cassava can be sold in each of these markets not only indicates which markets it is more likely to enter, but also gives an estimates of the level of productivity which new cassava pro- duction technology must attain in arder for it to be .-• -79- competitive. Knowledge about the quantities of cassava which can be absorbed at various prices in the different markets can contribute to the determination of the relative impor- tance of alternative markets for cassava. Since the charac- teristics of cassava and cassava production systems for these various markets may not be uniform~ information about the relative importance of these markets can be an aid in setting the objectives for technology development. Because the mandate of CIAT emphasizes increasing the availability of food supplies in Latín America, here primary focus will be placed on analyzing the markets for cassava where it contributes to food consumption in the region. There may be a great potential for growth in the use of cassava for industrial purposes, especially as a feedstock for alcohol; nevertheless, here only the market for cassava as a fresh vegetable, as processed food, and as animal feed will be considered . 3.2.1. FRESH MARKET Fresh cassava provides a large proportion of total ca- lories in average aggregate national diets only in Paraguay~ where 10% of calories come from fresh cassava (Table 3.7). Elsewhere in Latin America at most 3% of calories come from fresh cassava. Although fresh cassava does not appear to be a mainstay in average national diets~ it is relatively more important -80- among sorne groups. In particular, fresh cassava consumption is much greater in rural than urban areas (Tabl e 3.3). This is probably in large part a co~sequence of the high perishab- ility of cassava, which makes it more expensive to obtain in ·· urban areas distant from centers of cassava production . Mar- keting costs form a high proportion of the costs of cassava to the final consumer. Because of this perishability con- straint a highly efficient provision of marketing services (assembly, transportation, retailing) is necessary to get cassava into the hands of consumers befare it begins to de- teriorate. Such systems do exist, for example, in the urban Colombian fresh market. Clearly, though, the high standards of performance required of thes e sy stems are difficu lt to attain and entail substantial costs. These marketing costs are further increased due to the bulkiness of the crop and the resultant high transport costs . Price, of course, is a critical factor in determining level s of consumpt ion of alternative foods and the higher cost per calorie of fresh cassava compared to rice (Table 3.8), is doubtless a major reason for rice being on average a far more important so urce of calories than f resh cassava in urban Latin America. With few exception s , though, cassava is cheaper on a per calorie ba s is than potatoes. Cassava is consumed in smaller quantities than potatoes in a number of cities even though it is clearly cheaper(Table 3.22). Consumer preferences may play a role in this, but the greater -81- perishability of cassava is probably also depressing its consumption. Urban consumers always face the risk that the cassava they buy may be already deteriorating at the time of purchase, or will before they are able to use it. Frequent consumption of cassava also requires the inconvenience of equally frequent shopping for it because it can nct te stored. Thus, though the price may be lower than potatoes, there are additional implicit costs to the cassava consumer. Hence, improved production technology which lowered the supply price of cassava would not necessarily alone lead to a dramatic increase in the consumption of cassava since it is already comparatively cheap in relation to other root crops. Furthermore, because of the high marketing margins, even substantial reductions in farm level prices will result in only a marginal decline in prices at the consumer level. Improved storage technology may thus be equally or more important for permitting greater consumption of fresh cassava, especially in the urban market. Nevertheless, although high perishability may be a sig- nificant constraint on fresh cassava consumption, preliminary evidence does suggest that the demand for cassava is respon- sive to price changes. Price elasticities of demand for fresh cassava estimated from a rather narrow data base (one year of data from Cali, Colombia), appear to be quite high, in the range of -2.2 to -3.2 (Table 3.9). This result holds for the Cali data whether retail or wholesale prices are -82- utilized; for both monthly and weekly data; and for either OLS or two stage least squares estimation. In contrast to the meager past available evidence (25 ), these data indicate that consumers will significantly alter their consumption of fresh cassava in response to price changes ll. Moreover, though the reliability of estimates based on such scanty data ought not to be exagerated, the finding of an elastic demand for cassava is more consistent with its apparent role as a vegetable that makes a fairly small contribution to the diet, than were the past findings of an inelastic demand which woul d be more characteristic of a food that formed a major part of the diet . The demand for fresh cassava is affected by income as well as by price. Data from both Brazil and Colombia (Tables 3.10 and 3.11) show that expenditures on fresh cassava gen- erally rise with income though there is sorne tendency for expenditure to level off in the highest income groups. Ex- penditure elasticities of demand for fresh cassava present a similar pattern (Table 3.12). The expenditure elasticity of demand for fresh cassava is low but positive in the lowest income quartile in three Colombian cities. The elasticity tends to rise in the two ll Estimated price elasticities refer to marginal changes. While a 1% drop in price could be expected to be associated with a 2.5% change in consumption, it would be inappropriate to infer from this that a large price decline, say of 50%, would lead to a proportional increase in consumption of 125%. -83- middle income quartiles, and is zero or negative in the highest income group . These findings suggest that among the lowest income families, fresh cassava consumption does not rise rapidly with income increases. The difficulties of managing perishability may be greater among low income households where refrigerators are less common and where housewives have greater work respon- sibilities that limit their capacity to cope with the time consuming chore of frequent purchase of fresh cassava. Also, since cassava is not the cheapest source of calories, these families may find ita better strategy to increase purchases of commodities that give a higher return in nutrients per unit of expenditure. However, once a certain income threshold is reached, the propen s ity to purchase cassava as incomes rise is quite strong. In the lower-middle income groups the demand for fresh cassava is income elastic . In commo n with most foods at higher income levels, consumption ceas es to grow with in come. Annual growth rates in demand projected for fresh cassava, as suming constant prices, are presented in Table 3.13. These growth rates take into account distinc t rates of population and income growth for urban and rural areas as well as different levels of current consumption and dif- ferent income elasticities. Unless the income elasticity of demand for fresh cassava in rural areas wa s el astic, -84- demand growth for fresh cassava would be constrained to modest level s , below three per cent. This is anticipated to occur as population moves out of high cassava consuming rural areas (the rural population is expected to continue declin- ing) into urban centers where fresh cassava consumption is much less. In summary, then, fresh cassava in not a dietary staple in Latín America, with the except io n of Paraguay. Perish- ability of cassava appears to be an important constraint on its consumption, leading to lower le vels bein g consumed in urban than rural settings and con tributing to a lower con- sumption of cassava than potatoes in cities, e ven though cassava is generally cheaper tha n potatoes . The demand for fresh cassava may be more price elastic than has been here- tofore believed. Finally, fresh cassava consumption rises with income except among the highe st income groups. The demand for fresh cassava in urban Colombia. is income elastic among middle income and inelastic but positive among the lowest income hou seh olds~ 3.2.2. FLOUR MARKET In many parts of th e world cassava is processe d into sorne form so that i t is more storable than when fresh, thus circumventing the limits on the consumptíon of cassava im- posed by its perishability and, for sorne va rieties, a high H C N e 'o n te n t . T h e re a re m a n y t r a d i t i o n a 1 w a y s o f p ro e es s i n g cassava: in Brazil, the flour-like farinha da mandioca is -85- produced; in Venezuela and the Caribbean the bread-like casabe is produced; in West Africa, gari, a fermented, roasted product is a staple for many. Cassava flour (farinha da mandioca) is the principal form in which cassava is consumed in Latín America (Table 3.2), but only because of the dominance of Brazil in the aggregate. While cassava flour contributes only about 7% of total calorie intake in Brazil, its importance varies substantially by region (Table 3.14). In the Brazilian Northeast, cassava flour is the principal (and cheapest) calorie source, accounting for almost a quarter of total calorie consumption (Table 3.15). Moreover, cassava flour is principally a staple among the peor (Table 3.16), with consumption declining in the higher income stratas. lndications are that cassava flour consumption has been declining in Brazil. This is partly dueto an apparent ne- gative income elasticity. However, prices have been rising rapidly since 1975, due to apparent declines in cassava pro- duction. Moreover, with the maintenance of price subsidies on wheat flour consumption (which were just recently removed), wheat flour prices were maintained at as much as one-half the price of cassava flour in the later part of the seventies. While upward price pre ss ure has occurred for a basic calorie staple of the poor (farinha), the removal of the wheat flour - subsidy will put further pressure on their food budgets and will probably halt the s ubstitution process. Thus, improved -86- cassava production technology for the Brazilian Northeast would probably have an immediate impact on nutritional le- vels, bringing down farinha prices and reversing the sub- stitution process. While traditional systems of cassava processing have been successful in creating l ess perishable products, their use tends to be restricted to their regions of origin, due apparently to differences in consumer tastes. Thus, there is a need for identificatio n of sorne way of processing cassava that will lead to a produc t that will be widely accepted by consumers. Since cassava flour can be incorpo rated into bread at levels of 10-15% with li tt le to no noticeable effect on quality, the use of cassava flour in bread making appears to be one attractive prospect. This is particularly true in Latin America where wheat forms an important part of the diet in many countries. Per capita consumptio n of wheat has risen in Latín America from about 30 kgs/capita/year in 1961-63 to nearly 50 kgs/capita/yea r 1976-78 (Tab l e 3.17). Today wh eat is one of the l eading sources of bo th calories and proteins in the diet of most Latín America coutnries, generally providing more than 10% of both calories and proteins. At the same time that wheat occupies an important role in the Latin American di et and that its consumption has been -87- rising, imports of wheat into the region have more than tripled to over 9 millions/tons ayear (Table 3.18). Not only have imports of wheat been growing, but imports have been increasing faster than domestic production, so that whereas in 1961-63 about half of the wheat consumed in Latín America was domestically produced, this figure has fallen to about 40% (Table 3.18). Hence, the use of cassava to partially substitute for wheat flour in breads and pastas could promote sorne key economic objectives in the reduction of the ever growing burden of wheat imports and the farm income and employment effects of increased cassava production. Despite these po- sitive prospects, there are sorne factors that impede the use of cassava as a wheat flour substitute. Maintainence of end product quality is an important consideration, especially in leavened products. This neces- sitates the use of fairly low proportions of cassava in the flour mixture and also requires that the cassava flour be of very high quality. To obtain high quality cassava flour free of impurities may be difficult, particularly if the cassava is sun dried at a village level prior to milling. The use of small amounts of cassava flour in the flour mixture, while prese rving product quality, reduces the po- tential cost reductions to be achieved by utilizing cassava flour . For example, if cassava were 10 % cheaper than wheat -88- flour, substitution of 10 % cassava in wheat flour would reduce total costs only 1%, perhaps barely sufficient to cover the costs of mixing and handl ing. Due to the low proportion of cassava that can be incorporated into wheat flour, the price differential betw een cassava and wheat must be quite substantial before any significant cost reduc- tion in end product costs well be observed. Thus, in terms of motivating cassava flour sub s ti tut ion mer ely through the profit incentive, price differentials would have to be substant ial . However, the social bene fits of such a program might be achieved with a much more limited price s pre ad by administrative arder, given that prívate costs are covered. Because cass ava is low in pro tei n, inclusion of cassava flour in wheat-products will lower nutritional quality some- what . With wh eat one of the top three protein sources in the diets of most Latin American countries, gro ups that were both nutritionally at ri sk and he avily depende nt upon whea t as a source of protein might suf f er a deterioration in nu- tritional status due to the use of cassava f l our as a par t ial substitute for whe a t flour. Food consumption stu di es cou ld establis h wh ether t hi s wa s indeed a se ri ous threa t although use of small amount s of cass ava in whea t products seems un- l ik e ly to creat e grave nutritional defici encies ( see Chapter 2). Neverthel ess , if it did appear to be a sign ificant problem, then it i s possib l e to use a high prote i n f lo ur , s uch as soy f l ou r, as a suppl ement along wit h cassava flour. -89- However, this will further narrow profitability margins. 3.2.3. ANIMAL FEED MARKET The third food related market in which cassava may have a large unrealized potential in Latin America is the animal feed market. The animal feed concentrates industry has be e n growing very rapidly in the region in the decade of the seventies, with many countries attaining annual growth rates of more than 10% (Table 3.19). The main ímpetus for this growth has come from the poultry industry which absorbs the bulk of concentrates production in Latín America (Table 3.19). The expansion of pou1try production has exceeded that of other meats, and has fueled a strong growth in~mand for concentrate feeds. This rapid growth in poultry production has been propelled by both supply and demand factors. The ease of transfer of modern poultry production technology from Europe and North America has transformed poultry from a traditional enterprise to large scale specialized opera- tions utilizing modern capital intensive technology, with most feed being purchased in concentrate form. This increased poultry production has found a ready market. The income elasticity of demand for poultry is higher than that for other meats in Latin America, so that economic growth in urban centers has provided a powerful stimulus to the demand for poultry (see Chapter 2). Moreover, the price of poultry has been declining relative to that of other meats in sorne countries (Figures 3.1 and 3.2). -90- The vigorous demand for poultry has led to an associated demand for feeds. Sorghum, which is used almost exclusively as an animal feed in Latin America, has been of critical importance in meeting the buoyant demand for feed. It has displayed a higher rate of growth than all other crops in most Latin America countries. It alone has accounted for half of the increased output of all crops in Mexico, one quarter in Colombia, and one tenth of the rise in total staple food production in Latin America between 1961-65 and 1974-76 ( 2 ). This large increase in sorgh um pr oduction has not, however, been sufficient to match t he burg eoning demand for feed grains. Latin America (excluding the southern cone) is a substantial importer of sorghum and also maize, which in sorne countries ís used as a feed grain {Table 3.20}. In absolute terms Mexico i s the largest importer, purchasing over half a million tons of sorghum annually as well as 1.3 million tons of maize, the l atter amount being rough1y equiva l ent to the quantity of ma i ze used as animal feed in Mexico in 1972-74. Imports of grains and oilseeds in 1980 are estimated to be 10.3 mi ll ion tons. Venezuela is propor- tionally the greatest importer, buying on the world market 62 % and 44% respective l y of apparent domestic consumption of sorghum and maize . Moreover, it may be increasingly difficult to sustain the historie rates of output growth in feed grains, which -91- have so far been unable to fill the rising demand. Much of output growth that has been attained has been through area expansion. Maize production in Latín America grew over 50% during the 1960's, with increased area accounting for the majority of the growth. In the 1970's, as area expansion in maize ceased, production grew a total of only 7% in the entire decade. Similarly over two-thirds of product ion gains in .sorghum have been dueto increased area under cultivation. With a rising marginal cost of increasing area to sorghum, it will be more difficult to achieve future gains in feed grain production than it has been in the past. It is clear that despite large gains in domestic produc- tion of feed grains, demand has continued to grow faster than production with levels of imports climbing as a result. Based on these trends FAO projects that total coarse grain imports into Latín America will increase by 19 85 to between 40% and 100% above the 1974-76 figures. The widening gap between projected consumption of feed and domestic production creates a number of problems for the Latin American policy ma ker. These difficulties are intensified by the multi-objective framework within which policy is typically made, with a vari ety of different, sorne- times conf li cting , goals competing for attention. Among these, ample food supp lies is a major concern, especially to maintain urban food prices. Even though cheap imports may be able to sat i sfy this objective, such an approach will tend -92- to exacerbate already chronic trade deficits in many Latín American countries. The inability of increased production of conventional feed grains to meet the growing dema nd at prevailing prices, as well as the disposition to at temp t to increase domestic availability rather than rely on foreign sources of cheap carbohydrates as an animal feed, in duces a search for new sources of animal feed, the most promising of which is cassava. Large quantities of imported Asía n cas sava are already being used in the European feed concentrate industry. The European experience demonstrates that cassava can be a suit- able source of carbohydrates in animal feeds even though it is very low in protein. Cur r ently cassava is not a majar constituent of feed concentrates in Latín America although the crop is widely cultivated in the tropical lowlands of the regían. Cassava may be a particularly attractive alternative to sorghum and other coarse gra i ns for a variety of reason. First, it is well adapted to the acid infe rti l e s oils where feed grains cannot be produced at low cost. There are immense uncultivated areas of these s oil typ es in So uth America which cou l d be converted to cassava pro duction. Second, cassava has a very high yield poten tia l, with produc- tion of up to 5 tbns of dry matter per hectar e per year feasible under margina l conditions. -93- . Third, while sorghum is generally produced in large farms with mechanized technology in Latín America, cassava remains a relatively labor intensive crop produced mainly by small farmers. Hence, there exists the possibility that increased production of cassava for the animal feed market could have a positive effect on the small farm sector wh ile creating substantial rural employment . Price is the crucial determinent of whether cassava can in fact tap the fast growing market for feeds. A linear programming least cost feed mix model has been constructed for poultry broilers in Colombia in arder to ascertain the prices at which cassava would be competitive in this market . While at current market prices cassava is not included in least cost diets, ata price of 3.3 pesos/kg. cassava would enter the optimum ration, given the price regime of March 1980 ~ One can use estimates of current costs of production along with estimated costs of chipping and drying to project the per hectare yields that would have to be attained with the present cost structure in arder to produce cassava cheap- ly enough that it would be incorporated in feed concentrates. Such an exercise indi cates that with yields of roughly 15 tons per hectare, costs of production would fall sufficiently so that cassava would be competitive in the Colombian feed market . -94- With new production technology, such yields may be pos- sible in the low cost production zones, such as the north coast of Colombia. Here cassava faces considerable moisture stress and is cu lti vated on poor soils. Wi t h current yields in Colombia averaging between 6 to 9 tons per hectare, achievement of 15 ton yie lds in t he north coast app ears to te a challeng in g though emminently feasible target. Such a new high yielding cas s ava production technology could result in a number of favo r able consequen ces . This cheaper cassava would reduce the cos t of animal feed, henc e the cost of production of poultry, lea ding t o a consumer savings in Colombia estimated at $1 , 32 0,00 0 per year. More- over, this increased cassava production would lead to the creatio n of new employment for the equivalent of 15,600 workers. Finally, it could potentially eliminate Colombia's present dependence on imported sorghum for feed, thus realiz- ing a foreign exchange savings of $12.7 million, based on 1976-79 average imports and 1979 sorghum prices. In summary, feed grain production ha s not been able to keep up with the demand for feed, spurred in l a rge part by strong consumer demand for pou ltry and co s t re ducing innova- tion in the pou l try industry. Consequentl y , t here has been upward pressure on feed prices and imports of feed have been r isin g in many Latin American countries des pi t e very high ac hiev ed growth rates in sorghum output. Us e of cassava in feed concentrates is an appealing so l ution to th e widening -95- gap between the demand for feed and domestic supply. Cassava is especially promising because it has a relatively high yield potential under the marginal conditions that charac- terize extensive areas of under utilized land in Latín America and also because it is produced primarily by small farmers with labor intensive technology . A case study of the Colombian feed market has s uggested that new cost reducing production technology is essentia l for cassava to be able to enter the feed market in Colombi a . Cassava may face similarly positive prospects in oth e r f eed deficit nations, such as Mexico, Peru and Venezuela. However, the prices of feed grains in Colombia are well above world market prices. Were cassava to face would market compet i t ion with low cost coarse grains, then entry in t o the fee d market would be rather more difficult than has be en i ndi cate d from the Colombian case s t udy and the r equirement s f or new tech- nology would likewi se be more ri gorou s . 3.2.4. MARKET GROWTH POTENTIAL The potential growth prospects fo r cassava in t he fres h, flour and feed markets fo r Colombia are present ed i n Tabl e 3 . 21. Colombia is no t an ideall y ty pi cal case , and thus caution ne eds t o be exe r c i se d in ge nerali zi ng from t he con- ditions in mar ke t s in on e country to that of all Latin Ame ri ca . Colombi a is in on e sense representa t ive of t he rest of -96- Latin America, except for Brazil, in that today the fresh market for cassava is the most important. Projected growth of demand in this market is clearly non-zero, but it does not seem to have the same potential for furth er expansion as do the flour and feed markets . While improved storage techniques for fresh cassava might re veal a strong latent demand for the fresh product, the impact of such a new technology is highly s peculative at this time . The flour market may be sli ght ly less promising than the feed market in Colombia, bot h i n t hat it appea rs to be a smaller market, and also becau s e th e quality s tandards requir·ed of cassava in this market ar e likely to be more rigorous. Nonetheless, cheap hi gh qu a lity cassa va flour could find a not insubstantia l ma rket as a wheat substitute both in Colombia and e l sewhere in Latin America. The feed market may offer the best promise both in that it is the largest potential growth market facing cassava (ignoring non-food markets), and also because the quality standards needed in this market are rela xe d compared to the fresh and flour markets. Nevertheles s , cassava is most un- likely to be able to enter this market, at l east in Colombia, without a cost-reducing, yie l d- i ncreasin g , improved technology. Moreover, even in this market cassava could face tough inter- national competition from low cost producer s of feed grains. Cassava probably has good prospects in thi s market in the policy context of a continued po l itical ·commitment to import -97- substitution and high utilization of domest i c resources, but it would have difficulty in competing in a free trade regime, unless either the impact of new technology were somewhat greater than has been assumed to be the case here or there were a tendency for world feedgrain prices to increase. 3.3. RESEARCH !MPLICATIONS As was true of soybeans and sorghum in 1960, the import- ance of cassava in Latín America líes not so mu ch in current production and utilization- although it is regionally im- portant in Paraguay and the Brazilian Northeast- but i n its potential. As was shown for the case of Colombia, for tra- ditional markets commercial production could increase by no more than 2.7 % per year in the next decade. Were the com- posite flour and feed concentrate markets to be fully exploited, the potential production growth rate could be as high as 10% per annum . The potential impact on farmer in- comes and labor utilization is obvious. Moreover, to enter these markets pric es would have to be substantially reduced , providing a price floor to farmers and, given the hi gh price elasticity of demand for fresh cassava, resultin g in a potential marked increase in urban fresh consumption, due to the resultant price decline. The principal con c lusion to be reached, then, is that new production technology is absolutely necessa ry to realize this potential but that the extension of new production technology without th e associated development of these -98- alternative markets will, outside the Brazilian Northeast, either face farmer resistance or result in a retrogressive impact on farmer incomes, since area reduction within the current production structure would result in many farmers moving out of production. The mere existence of im prove d production technology, moreover, does not guarante e the de- velopment of these alternative markets. Processing t ec hnol- ogy is required, market linkages ne ed to be made, an d profitability margins need to be apparent, which may not be the case when based solely on urba n fres h marke t prices (a dual price structure is usually f ound wh ere an industrial and fresh urban food market compete ~/), Cassava techno~ogy generation and transfer must thus take pla ce within a systems framework integrating both production and utilization. Within this systems framework, the principal economic research issues are defined in a hierarch ic al manner, as follows: 4/ a) Evaluation of the agronomic potential of the crop. b) Cassava farming systems evaluation. e) Analysis of utilization and marketing systems. d) Analysis of aggregate demand and production poten- ti al. For example, in the state of Sao Paulo in Brazil in 1980, farm level prices for fresh cassava for the urban market was 2 to 4 times higher than the price of cassava for industrial use. In sorne cases there are quality differences in the cassava; in other cases it is the same cassava. Similar cases have been observed in Co- lombia and Ecuador. . -99- Cassava research must necessarily exceed the scope of most traditional crop research programs. While increasing the complexity of the task, the framework insures a com- prehensive evaluation of research priorities and of potential constraints on technology adoption at each systems level. The preceding analysis and the potential productivity of the crop established by the cassava program would strongly argue that the potential of cassava be pursued. TABLE 3.1 : CASSAVA : STATISTICS ON AREA, PRODUCTION, AND MARKETING, 1971-76 REGION AND COUNTRY ON-FARM 8~E8 +6~~~HA E~QDUCIIQ~ CQt:JSUt::lEIIQr:.l t::18~~EIED EBQCESSED HECT ARES TONS TONS TONS TONS TROPICAL LATIN AMERICA BRAZI L (75) 2/ L307 ,251 8.9 11,672,739 2,687,923 8,984,817 6,178,394 PARAGUAY (76) 56,558 14,8 836,940 719,768 117,172 175,498 VENEZUELA (75) 37,417 8.5 317,393 77,131 240,262 66,670 ANDEAN BOLIVIA (72) 26,426 7.3 193.128 N.A N.A. LOOO COLOMBIA (73) 117,540 6.5 764,015 N.A. N.A. 3,179 ECUAOOR (74) 23,536 5,8 136,754 14,788 122,006 2.000 PERU (76) 36,055 8.3 299,128 N.A. N.A. 1.500 CENTRAL AMERICA 1 1-' COSTA RICA (73) 2,077 6.6 13,811 L275 12,536 925 o o EL SALVAOOR (71) L166 14,1 16,470 N.A. N.A. 1 GUATEMALA (72-74) 2,333 3.0 7,000 N.A. N.A. 2,512 HONDURAS (7 4) 3,644 2.7 9,743 N.A. N.A. NICARAGUA. (74) 5,112 4.8 24,608 N.A. N.A. PANAMA <72-74) 4,555 8.6 39.174 N.A. N.A. 3,933 CARIBBEAN CUBA (76) 19,338 8.0 154.7~ 70,368 84,336 DOMINICAN REP, (75) 22,300 8.1 179.750 87,150 90.axl N.A. HAITI (72-74) 31,556 4.5 142,000 N.A. N.A. 138,CXXl JAMAICA (72-74) 3,405 5.0 17,025 N.A. N.A. 2,554 TOTAL LATIN AMERICA 1,700,291 8.7 14,824,422 4,075,000 11 10,749,~0 6,576,165 l/ ESTIMATE 2/ NLMBER INDICATES TI-lE YEAR IN WHI Q-1 DATA WAS OBTAI NED ' TABLf 3o2 o CflSSAVA : UTILIZATIOO IN LATIN MRICA, 1971-76 HUMAN CONSUMPTI ON ANIMAL TOTAL REG ION AND COUNTRY FRESH PROCESSED STAROi FEED CONSLM'TI ON ------------ METRIC TONS ------------- TROPICAL LA TI N Nv1ER I CA BRAZIL fi:>7 ,730 5,898,394 2oo,cm 4,8(.6,615 ·11,672,739 PARAGUAY 299,825 136,998 38,500 361,617 836,940 VENEZUELA ll9,917 42,fffi 24,064 13(),81} 317,392 ANDEAN BOLIVIA fR:,,923 - LOOJ 123,205 193,128 COLot-1BIA 466,042 - 3,179 294,794 764,015 ECU~ 124,103 - 2,cm 10,fi:>5 136,794 PERU 172,420 - 1,500 125,208 299,128 1 .... o CENTRAL AM:R 1 CA .... 1 COSTA RICA 12,gg{) - 925 - 13,8ll EL SALVADOR 16,470 - - - 16,470 Gl.U\ TEMALA 4,488 - 2,512 - 7,00) HONDURAS 9,743 - - - 9,743 NICARAGUA 24,608 - - - 24,608 PANWA 29,341 300 3,633 5,~ 39,174 CARIBBEAN CUBA 154,704 - - - 154,704 DOMINICAN REP o 175,700 ? - 4,050 179,750 HAITI - 138,(ID - 4,ro:l 142,CXX) J.AMAICA 14,471 - 2,554 - 17,025 TOTAL LATIN AMERICA 2,381,377 6,216,298 359,867 5,866,880 14,824,422 IABLE 3.3 , (ASSAVA : ES TI MATES OF KURAL ANO URBAN LONSUMPT ION OF FRESH LASSAVA IN LATI N AMERICA COUNTRY RURAL CON SUMPTION URBAN CONSUMPTION TOTAL CONSUMPTION PER CAPITA TOTAL PER CAPITA TOTAL PER CAPITA TOTAL KG TONS KG TONS KG TONS TROPICAL LATIN AMERICA BRAZI L (75) 11.2 515,805 2.7 171,925 6.3 687,730 PARAGUAY (76) 180.0 252,540 35.0 47,285 110.1 299,825 VENEZUELA (75) 27.4 72,062 5.0 47,915 9.8 119,917 ANDEAN BOLIVIA (72) 17.0 60,017 5.4 8,906 15.3 68,923 COLOMBIA (73) 35.0 298,291 16.5 207,751 20.4 446,042 ECUADOR (74) 31.0 102.127 6.0 21,282 19.0 124,109 PERU (76) 17.3 116,273 6.2 56.147 10.9 172.420 CENTRAL AMERICA 1 ~ COSTA RICA (73) N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 6.9 12,886 o N 1 EL SALVADOR (71) N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 4.5 16,470 GUATEMALA (72-74) N.A. N.A. N.A . N.A. 0.8 4,488 HONDURAS (74) 3.5 6,295 3.5 3, 448 3.5 9,743 NICARAGUA (74) N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 11.0 24,608 PANAMA (72-74) N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 18.5 29,341 CARIBBEAN CUBA (76) 20.3 70,368 12.4 75, 674 16.0 154,704 DOMINICAN REP(75) N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 34.3 175,700 HAITI (72-74) N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. JAMAICA (72-74) N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 7.3 14,471 TOTAL LATIN AMERICA 1/ 19.0 1,683,531 5.6 697,846 11.1 2,381,377 1/ ESTIMATED FOR ONLY TROPICAL LATIN AMERICA, EXCLUDING MEXICO. . . TABLE 3.4. : BRAZIL : PRODUCTION ESTIMATES BY SOURCE, 1975 ~RQDUCIIQ~ AREA Tb~7~~ TONS HA (ASSAVA CENSUS 11,672,739 1,307,251 g,929 ÜFFICIAL 26,117,614 2,041,416 12,793 RICE CENSUS 7,548,930 5,662,875 1,333 ÜFFICrAL 7,781,538 5,306,270 1,504 SoYBEAN CENSUS 8,721,274 5,656,928 1,541 0FFICIAL 9,893,008 5,824,492 1,698 SouRcEs : CENsus : CENSO AGROPECUARIO, BRAZI L, FuNDACAO INsTITUTo BRAs iLEREIRo oo GEOGRAFIA EsTADISTICA, Rro DE JANEIRO, 1979. ÜFFICIAL : ANUARIO EsTADrsrrco oo BRAZIL, FuNDACAO INSTITUTO BRASI LEREIRO 00 GEOGRAFIA E EsTADISTICA, Rro DE JANEIRO, 1977. 1 ..... o 1...1 1 TABLE 3.5. : PARAGUAY : ON-FARM FEEDING OF CASSAVA TO HOGS PRODUCTION HoG PoPULATION (ASSAVA'S CONTRIBUTION CASSAVA UNIT DISTRIBUTION TO ENERGY INTAKE CONSUMPTION - % % TONS FARROWING 1-4 sows 71.4 22.6 255.074 5-19 sows 6.5 21.6 36.018 20 OR MORE 4.5 o o FATTENING 1-9 HEAD 15.9 34.9 68.336 10-49 HEAD 0.7 9.2 1.158 50 OR MORE 1.0 5.9 1.031 TOTAL 100.0 22 .4 361.617 SouRcE : M. REGUROGA AND H. KuGLER, ·'LA PRooucc r oN PoRciNA EN PARGUAY' 1 ' MIMEO, CIAT, 1979. 1 ...... o .,.. 1 TABLE 3.6 o CASSAVA: DISTRIBUCION OF NUMBER OF FARMERS, AREA, AND PRODUCTION BY FARM SxzE AND AREA HARVESTED, BRAZIL <1975) AND EcuADOR (1974). AREA BRAZIL ECUADOR STRATIFICATION FARMERS AREA PRODUCTION FARMERS AREA PRODUCTION HECT ARES -------------------------- PERCENT ------------------------- FARM SIZE : LESS THAN 5 44.6 31.9 28.7 39 .5 22.5 20 .7 5 TO 10 13.6 12 .8 13.2 14.6 13.0 11.8 10 TO 20 14.9 14.9 15.9 13.7 14.2 13 .0 20 TO 50 16.0 20.6 22.1 18.0 21.6 21.2 50 TO 100 5.5 8.9 9.2 14.7 18.9 20.1 100 TO 500 4.7 8.7 8.7 3.8 7.9 10.1 1 500 TO 1000 0.5 1.2 1.2 0.2 1.2 1.5 .... o vo GREATER THAN 100 0.3 1.0 1.0 0.1 0.6 1.5 1 AREA HARVESTED LESS THAN 1 67.7 30.1 30.6 76.8 N.A. N.A. 1 TO 2 21.1 28.3 28.4 16.8 N.A. N.A. 2 TO 5 9.7 27.9 27 .3 5.8 N.A . . 5 TO 10 1.1 7.4 7.1 0.4 N.A. N.A. 10 TO 20 0.3 3.8 3.9 0.1 N.A. N.A. GREATER THAN 20 0.1 2.4 2.6 - N.A. N.A. TOTAL 1,429,528 1,07,251 11,672,739 39,945 23,536 136,794 SouRcE : CENSo AGROPECUARIO, BRAZIL, FIBGE, Rro DE JANEIRo, 1979: II CENSO ~ROPECUARIO ~, INSTITUTO NAciONAL DE EsTADISTICA Y CENSOS, QuiTO, 1979. ' TABLE 3.7. DIETERY CONTRIBUTION OF FRESH CASSAVA AND POTA TOES FRESH ALL ROOTS COUNTRY ~QIAIQES C8SS8Y.8 AND IUBERS (PER CENT OF TOTAL CALORIES) BRAZIL 0.8 2.9 10.3 MEXICO 0.5 0.0 0.5 BOLIVIA 10.1 4.4 15.5 1 COLOMBIA 3.0 3.2 8.1 ..... o 5.4 2.8 8.5 O\ ECUADOR 1 PARAGUAY 0.1 11.3 17.0 PERU 8.3 2.8 13.0 VENEZUELA 0.8 1.7 3.8 CENTRAL AMERICA 0.3 0.7 1.2 CARIBBEAN 0.4 2.4 6.2 TOTAL A 1.9 2.8 8.8 A EXCLUDES MEXICO SOURCE: FAO Fooo BALANCE SHEETs, 1972-74 -107- TABLE 3.8. RELATIVE PRICES PER CALORIE FOR FRESH CASSAVA AND OTHER FOODS 1 R2 .49 .71 .60 .66 DW 1.85 2. 44 2.69 2.02 OWN PRICE ELASTICITY 3.18 2.58 2.23 2.54 't' VALUES IN PARENTHESES SouRCE: UNPUBLI SHED DATA, CAVASA, CALI, CoLOMBIA , 1979. .TABLE 3.10.PER CAPITA EXPENDITURES ON FRESH CASSAVA BY INCOME GROUP, BRAZIL, 1975 FAMILY INCOME LEVEL ($CRU/YEAR) REGION 0-8499 9000-15799 15800-31599 31600+ URBAN BELO HORIZONTE 2.1 1.4 7.5 3.4 PORTO ALEGRE 8.7 7.5 9.2 5.8 RECIFE 2.5 2.9 3.0 3.7 SAO PAULO 0.3 1.5 2.1 2.6 RURAL NORTHEAST 4.7 6.0 SOUTH 11.7 22.6 22.2 17.8 MINAS GERAIS 2.5 3.4 6.2 11.4 SouRcE: EsTUDo NACIONAL DA DESPESA FAMILIAR, FuNDA~Ao INSTI- TUTO BRASILERO DE GEOGRAFIA E ESTATI CA , RÍo DE JANEIRO, 1978. 1 ...... o \C 1 TABLE 3.11. PER CAPITA EXPENDITURES ON FRESCH CASSAVA BY INCOME CLASS, COLOMBIA, 1957-58, PESOS/YEAR. CITY INCOME QUARTILE LOWEST 2 3 HIGHEST BARRANQUILLA 30.0 37.6 36.4 40.4 1 t-' BOGOTA 12.4 22.0 22.8 28.0 t-' o 1 CALI 18.0 26 .4 31.2 30. 8 SouRcE: ECIEL, BRooKINGs INSTITUTE, WAsH,, D.C. TABLE 3.12. EXPENDITURE ELASTICITIES OF DEMAND FOR FRESH CASSAVA CITY EXPENDITURE QUARTILE LOWEST 2 3 HIGHEST BARRANQUILLA 0.50 0.90 0.66 0.00 BOGOTA 0.44 1.06 1.16 -0.01 CALI 0.40 1.10 -0.23 -0.10 SouRcE: ECIEL DATA, BROOKINGS INsTITUTE, WAsH., D.C. 1 .... .... ..... 1 TABLE 3.13,PROJECTED GROWTH RATES FOR DEMAND OF FRESH CASSAVA, COLOMBIA C%/YR) TOTAL RURAL URBAN RURAL URBAN DEMAND DEMAND DEMAND INCOME INCOME GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH ELASTI CI TY ELASTICITY -2.20 o 0.5 1 l. 96 5.44 ...... ...... !'V 2.70 -0.59 5.44 0.5 0.5 1 3.96 l. 03 6.40 l. O l. O TABLE 3.14. CASSAVA PER CAPITA CONSUMPTION IN BRAZIL IN FRESH AND FLOUR FORMS, 1960 AND 1975 COUNTRY 1960 19Z5 FRESH CASSAVA TOTAL FRESH CASSAVA TOTAL CASSAVA FLOUR CASSAVA FLOUR ------------------------ KILOGRAMS ---------------------------- NORTHEAST 7.1 55.2 172.6 4.3 43.7 135.4 URBAN .9 26.8 81.3 ~.2 20.4 64.4 RURAL 10.3 69.7 219.4 .2 55.0 170.2 SOUTHEAST 11.8 17.0 62.8 4.5 5.9 22.2 ~RBAN 4.4 6.4 101:~ §·O 2.7 ~~:! URAL 20.2 29.0 .o 14.1 1 SAo PAuLo 5.7 3.7 16.8 2.4 1.1 5.7 t-t- Vol 2.5 ;.4 9.~ l.~ !:~ M·3 1 ~RBAN URAL 11.1 .8 20. 4. .4 SOUTH 44.6 12.1 80.9 15.8 3.5 26.3 URBAN RURAL 3.7 68.7 5.2 16.2 19.3 1 7.3 ~.6 2 .2 2.5 4.4 !5.1 6.4 NoRTH AND WEST - - - 5.0 23.6 75.8 URBAN - - - 0.4 45.5 136.9 BRAZIL 14.9 26.3 93.8 6.1 17.6 58.9 URBAN RURAL 3.0 24.7 !~:~ ~7.8 1 9.8 i·7 1 .2 9.7 29.4 3g.8 9 .4 SOURCE : GETULIO VARGAS FOUNDATION (15) AND IBGE (14), - 11 4- TABLE 3.15 Diet compositio•• and nutricnt cost to thc consumcr for calo rics in the Brazilian Northeast, 1975 Calories Per Percent age of Annual Cost t o t he Consumer of Food Categories Adult Unit Calories Maintaining Consumption of One Per Day ( % ) Hu ndred Calories from Each Food8 (Cruzciros) Cereals and Dcrlvotlves 5 18 26.8 48 Rice 242 12.5 42 Corn 108 5.6 35 Wheat Products 161 0 .3 65 O th ors 7 0.4 114 Tubers 4 96 25.7 2 3 Potato 2 0. 1 250 F rcsh Cassava 13 0.7 46 Cassavo F lour 454 2 :1.!; 20 Others 27 1.4 52 Sugars 210 10.9 30 Legumes 311 16 . 1 48 F icld Beans ancf Cowpeasb 280 14.5 44 Other Lcgumcs 31 1.6 36 Vegctables 10 0.5 520 F rults 35 1.8 1 5 7 Meat and Fish 1 79 9 .3 246 Bce l 74 3 .8 273 Por k 46 2. 4 1 26 Chic k en 13 0 .7 462 Canned Meat 2 0 . 1 250 Fish 23 1.2 296 O thers 21 1. 1 224 Eggs 10 0 .5 260 Milk and Chccsc 67 3 . 5 14 2 Oils and Fats 811 . 4 .4 7 4 Beveragcs 10 0 .5 900 TOTA L 1.930 100 76 a Calculatrd frnm thc ENDE F da t a on annua l oxocnditurcs per famil y bv div iding thesc ex pcntldures by an e"i· mated 3.5 adult equlva lcnts In tht: mean fa mlly o f llve and then divlding thcse ex nenditures by the numbor of cal o rles pcr adult dav. When m u ltiplied by 100 these cost are the cruzciro costs of obt ainin!l 100 ca lories/day ol each ltem during the en tire y ca r for onc adult. Expenses on m eals outsidc the house were not itemizcd; hence. they could no t be categor iled. Howcver, they wcrc on ly 5. 7% ol to t al l ood expenditu res and would probab/ y be b /ased t owa rds t he h ighcr c¡uall ty foo d ond bevcr agcs hcnce, their om lssion would bias d ownward expendlture data on hlgh qualitY foods ond bevcrages bu 1 not subst antlally effe<;t th c co m parisons o f the low cost calor le staple s. The calcula- tlon ls made in the fo llowing manncr: -: . · Expenses/F amlly· Year Ex p enses/Year X X 100 ~ Adu lt Eq ulvalc nt/ Family Calories 100 Calories/Day Adult Equivalent/Day b CowPet\s and fie ld bean¡. are gi\I Cn t he sarnc Portuquese w ord. Cowpe"s pretJoml nnto in Northcastcr n Product1on b u t fi l'ld bcans are p refcrred b y urban consumc rs. Consumptlon is p robably sbout eq~oll y d ivided oetween the two In thc No rthran. Sourcc: Calcula tc G~ografla e Est~tist lc a (FIBGE), Estu A ument ar A ntropo rnct ria, H cgl ao V, R10 de Janciro, 19 "18. p.2 1. TABLE 3.16 : BRAZI~IAN OORTHEAST : PER ülPITA CDLORIE CONSLfPTION BY INcorf: STRATA ANO FOOD SOURCE, 1975 TOTAL FOOD GROUP INCOME GROUP a POPULATION WEIGHT CEREALS AND ROOTS AND O I L AND OlHER PRODUCTS TUBERS SUGAR FATS ---------------------- CALORIES PER-DAY --------------------- LQ\1 .7~ 1813 449 546 188 44 MEDI!J-1 .155 2214 708 396 263 122 HIGH .095 2390 752 262 303 201 AVERAGE 1.00 1931 518 496 b 211 71 a LGJ = LESS THAN 2,26() CRUZEIROS ANNUAL TOTAL FAMI LY EXPENDITURE MEDILM = FRCYv1 2260 TO 4519 CRUZEIROS ANNUAL TOTAL FAMILY EXPENDITURE H I GH = t'ORE THAN 4519 b CAsSAVA FLOUR REPRESENTS 91.5% OF lHE ROOT AND TUBER SUB-TOTAL SouRCE : ANNUARIO EsTADISTica oo BRAZI L, F~DACAO lNsiTUTo BRASILERO DE GEOGRAFIA E EsTADISTICA, Rro DE JANEIRO, 1979 :&) 725 872 635 1 ..... ..... V1 1 TABLE 3.17, WHEAT CONSUMPTION IN LATIN AMERICA PER CAPITA PER CAPITA %TOTAL CALORIES %TOTAL PROTEIN COUNTRY APPARENT APPARENT FROM WHEAT FROM WHEAT CONSUMPTION CO NSUMPTION (1972-74) (1972-74) (1961-63) (1976-78) BRAZIL 36.7 56.0 10.7 11.4 MEXICO 41.5 50.0 11.4 12.7 BOLIVIA 15 .8 52.5 19.4 21.7 COLOMBIA 15.7 19.1 5.7 7.0 1 ...... ECUADOR 23.9 40.3 8.8 10.6 -(j\ 1 PARAGUAY 49.4 29.5 10.5 10.1 PERU 53.6 52.3 18.1 22.4 VENEZUELA 43.5 54.8 15.1 19.0 CENTRAL AME RICA 8.3 26.4 7.0 7.5 CARIBBEAN - 68.6 16.0 18.5 TOTAL 31.3 49 .4 11.3 12.7 SouRcE: FAO PRODUCTION YEARBOOK, VARIOUS ISSUES FAO Foon BALANCE SHEETS, 1972-74. TABLE 3.18. WHEAT IMPORTS IN LATIN AMERICA, (1,000 TONS/YEAR). COUNTRY IMPORTS IMPORTS IMPORTS AS PER CENT OF (1961-63) (1976-78) CONSUMPTION (1961-63) (1976-78) BRAZIL 2083 3509 79.2 56.9 MEXICO - 309 0.0 10.0 BOLIVIA 15 242 25 .9 80.9 COLOMBIA 118 422 47.4 91.9 ECUADOR 38 236 36.7 85.1 PARAGUAY 79 50 91.2 62.0 PERU 391 730 71.9 86.7 1 676 99.9 ...... VENEZUELA - - ...... ...., CENTRAL AMERICA 69 447 68.3 89.2 1 CARIBBEAN - 1464 - 100 .0 TOTAL 2916 9081 49.8 58.3 SouRcE : FAO TRADE VEARBOOK, VARious ISSUES FAO PRODUCTION YEARBOOK, VARIOUS ISSUES TABLE 3.19. FEED CONCENTRATES IN SELECTED LATIN AMERICAN COUNTRIES ANNUAL GROWTH RATE CONCENTRA TES PRODUCTION BRAZIL 13.0 COLOMBIA 12.6 MEXICO 8,4 PERU 12.9 VENEZUELA 10.9 N.A, = NOT AVA ILABLE %CONC ENTRATES %CONCENTRATES %CONCENTRATES FOR POULTY FOR SWINE OTHER 75 15 10 76 16 8 68 20 12 87 N.A. N.A, 60 27 13 SouRcE: FEDERAL, BoLETÍN EsTADÍSTico No. 5, BoGoTÁ, 1980: CoNJUNTURA EcoNÓJ~ícA, FuNDAcióN GETULio VARGAS, Río DE JAN EiRo, 1979: ANÁLisis DE SiTUACIÓN AG RO-iNDUSTRiAL, H.A. TORRES y J. HERNÁNDEZ , Li MA; ANNUARÍO EsTADÍsTico AGROPECUARio, MiNisTERio DE AGRi CULTURA, CARACAS , VENEZUELA . ,. 1 ..... ..... 00 1 TABLE 3.20 MAIZE AND SORGHUM IMPORTS MAIZE IMPORTS a SORGHLM IMPORTS a 1971-73 1976-78 I t-1PORTS AS % 1971-73 1976-78 IMPORTS AS % (QCD TONS) (OQO TONS) OF CONSUMPTION (1976-78) (OOJ TONS) (OOJ TONS) OF CONSLMPTION (1975-78) BRAZIL - 495 - 450 - - 3 - 20 MEXICO 210 1340 13 73 ~ 12 BOLIVIA 2 o o COLOMBIA 69 66 7 24 43 9 ECUADOR - 1 13 5 o 6 67 1 .... .... PARAGUAY 6 - 4 o o o o \0 - 1 PERU 107 212 24 27 18 23 VENEZUELA 140 543 44 361 5ll 62 CENTRAL Afv1ERICA 84 133 7 3 48 12 CARIBBEAN b 383 772 67 2 7 4 TOTAL 495 2575 16 487 853 13c SoURCE : FAO PRODUCTION YEARBOOK AND TRADE YEARBOOKS, VARIOUS ISSUES. a MINUS SIGNS DENOTE EXPORTS b lNCLUDES CUBA, f:)a.,rNICAN REPUBLIC, GlJYANA, HAITI, JAMAICA, TRINIDAD e ExcLUDES BRAZIL TABLE 3.21.GROWTH POTENTIAL OF CASSAVA MARKETS, COLOMBIA PROJECTIONS FOR 1990. FRESH FLOUR POULTRY CASSAVA MARKET FEED MAR KET MARKET CONSUMPTION 1979 547 o o (1000 TONS) 1 POTENTIAL MARKET, 1980 - 203 540 .._. N (1000 TONS) o 1 ANNUAL GROWTH 2. 7 4.8 6.2 RATE IN DEMAND PROJECT ED f\1ARKET INCREAS E 1990 VS 1980 168 324 986 (1000 TONS) -121- TABLE 3.22 CONSUMPTION OF FRESH CASSAVA AND POTATOES 2099 6.66 0 82 VF. NF lUFLA 321 319 344 1.091 25 PARAGUAY Q90 132Q 1697 5 .364 587 CURA 102 217 298 0~945 31 fCUA OOQ 225 377 l 87 o.59• 2 ~ O OM INI C A ~ RP 1lf7 183 169 O.!SJ6 JO 21589 34366 30969 98.306 114 ---------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------HONOlHH C:: 17 37 8 0.025 2 '-IICARH; UA 12 1 7 26 0.081 10 COS TA ~ ICA 9 lo 14 0.0'+4 7 PA N AMA 12 37 llO 0.127 22 GUATEMALA 5 7 8 0.025 1 EL SALVADOR 9 13 13 0.042 3 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------CENTIUL Alo4 ER ICA 64 121 109 0.346 5 · -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------GUYANA 10 o o o·.ooo o HAITI 1 1 o 135 l 89 0.601 34 .JAMAICA 1 1 17 31 0·099 1 5 TRI 111 I DAD F. TC 4 4 5 o.Ot6 .. AA RRAOOS 1 l 1 0.003 • -------------------------------------------------------------------·---------------CA~IR BE A III 136 156 227 o. 719 23 ---------------------------------------------------- - -------~----------------------TR OPICAL LATIN AM FRICA 2178Q 34.6 4 4 31 3 24 9Q. 371 103 ------------------------------------------------------------------~----------------AQ (,F NTI NA :: .:::0!) -0.4 -1·1:::::::::::: GU~H"'ALA 3.6*** 2.7•'** 3 .1 ::r'** o.z 4·3 *** 2."8* 3.4-.:00 -1.6:::::::::: 0.3 EL S~LI/ lOOi<. 4.¡o ::::o 1.4 3.ó*** 6. 6*** -2.2 0.2 -Z·S * 3.7 «* 3.1~:;:::: CENTRAL A'1ER ta.l--=** -1.0 6·3** <> 14.q *~:) 0.5 5.9:::: 3·1** -1.5 0.4 GU'f' .\ :~.\ o.o o.~ o.o -o.o o. o -G.v -o.o o.o -o.o H.\ IT l. 0.7::: 4.7 :::::::: 3.le: *~ o.s 5.9** z.e:::: 0.3*<> -1.1 0-6 J.\M.\ICA -0.9 9.):::;):::: ó.) c::::::: -15.2*** 7.8** -0.6 14.3::•::::o 1.5 6.9*** TRl~HDAJ ETC -2.30 4-4*** 1.90** o.z -0.2 -0.2 o.o 6.s :. ·*~ ~.z ~~ e BAR!UuJS -4.7 Ct;o z.s::::t;o* o ·2 5.5 2 .e .:rc:-.: 4.Qt.: -0.8 -0.6** -1.1 ~ :::c CARib!.=A\1 9 .0 5.3*** 5.7t:: t;~(1 20.0** 5.9**" 7.8*-ll·l -0.6 -2-1 PUPI::.:.L LH 5.9*** -1.2** 1.9:::: :;)0 S.b*~* 1.2* *~ 2·1* 0 .4 -2.4** * -0.8 *** AQuENTI'IA 2.1* -4. 3* -0.9 3-3*** -2. 2** 0.4 -1.3** -2. 2 .-1.] >:: 0 ----.------------------------.---------------.-------.------------------------------------------------------------- TEMPE~~TE LA 2.1* -4.3* -0.9 ).~:::o::: -z.2e::: Q.4 -t.3t::::: -z.z -l-3"* ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------LATI I\4 4'1Eq!C 5.9** "-' -1.2 C~(I 1.8*<1<~ 5.51)0:;) lo2óOt;l 2.7 (1 0 .4 -2.40.(<(1 -o.e ::::.:.;:: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .·