Tuesday, 10 March 2015

Agriculture: Future challenges By M. ASADUZZAMAN

Star ARCHIVE
Source: Star ARCHIVE
Historic Performance Of Agriculture: Despite a precipitous fall in the relative contribution to the GDP of Bangladesh, agriculture has performed remarkably well so far. There was a time when agriculture, broadly defined to include crops and horticulture; livestock and poultry; fisheries and forestry, accounted for the bulk of the economy in all respects, viz., GDP, employment, food security, foreign exchange earnings, and supply of industrial raw materials. In the early nineteen seventies the share of agriculture in the total GDP was more or less 60 percent and went down to 48percent by the early nineteen eighties. By the turn of the century, it had been halved to 24 percent or so. In recent years it has fallen further to slightly above 16 percent only, with the crop sub-sector contributing about 12-13 points of that.
Employment-wise however, the fall has been much more modest and agriculture still accounts for more or less one half of the total employed labour force. Also, despite such a fall in relative importance in the GDP, domestic production of food, particularly of rice has increased almost three times from nearly 12 mn metric tons (of husked paddy) in the late 1970s to 34-35 mn mt by now. And this has happened despite the overall fall in arable land under cultivation. At least in terms of availability of rice from domestic production, Bangladeshi farmers have managed to by and large feed the population which has more than doubled from the 75 million during liberation to above 160 million at present.
The record of growth appears to be not insubstantial. Based on official estimates of value added by the sector and sub-sectors, agriculture as a whole had been rising at an annual rate of just above 4 percent over 2005-06 to 2013-14. Among the sub-sectors fisheries had grown at the highest rate of 5.8 precnt closely followed by forestry at 5.3 percent. The contribution of livestock to the GDP had grown at the rate of 3.7 precnt while that of crops grew at the slowest rate of only 3.6 percent.  These apparently are not low growth rates, but may not be sufficient compared to the potential demand for their output. On the other hand these rates appear to be a little higher than what had been achieved earlier over a preceding period, say 1997-98 to 2007-08. For example agriculture grew at a rate of 3.4 percent and crops at 3.1 percent during that period.
Despite such achievements, agriculture operates almost upon a razor's edge on several counts. But before that, one must understand why agriculture remains so important despite the low contribution to GDP at present and its basic characteristics.

ROLE OF AGRICULTURE IN DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Historically in almost all major economies, agriculture plays or had played several key roles in the process of economic development. Most importantly, it provides food and employs the people - thus providing livelihood and income to most. It often supplies key raw materials for industrial processing, and is also a ready market for industrially processed goods such as necessary agricultural inputs (chemical, fertiliser etc.) and as well as domestically produced consumer goods. It earns foreign exchange through export of agricultural or agro-processed commodities, and supplies investible resources through various agricultural taxations as well as manipulation of terms of trade between agricultural and industrial sectors (i.e. relative cheapening of agricultural commodities as opposed to industrial goods) through pricing, taxation, and subsidy policies. There may yet be one other contribution of agriculture during the initial industrialisation process which is that the ready availability of the basic staples becomes the main wage good without which there would be inflationary pressure and the industrial wage would be higher and the domestic industrial production may not be competitive with others. Thus, growth in production of food crops indirectly helps industrialisation at least in the initial stages. In Bangladesh, agriculture has played all these roles in various combinations at different times particularly since the British period. Among all such roles of agriculture, that of ensuring food security will probably always remain paramount and essential for physical survival. That may appear to be now under challenge. To understand this, one needs to first take a look at the characteristics of Bangladesh agriculture.
Bangladesh agriculture may be characterised by
     Major influence of climatic and physical environmental factors including natural hazards such as floods, drought, cyclonic storms and the like;
    Preponderance of landless, marginal and small farmers operating no more than 2.5 acres or just about a hectare particularly in crop cultivation but increasing emergence of commercialised agricultural farming in case of livestock (dairy and poultry farming), fisheries and forestry (nurseries);
    Pre-eminence of crop cultivation, particularly heavy dependence on rice with increasing yet limited diversification to non-rice crops as well as non-crop agriculture such as livestock and poultry and fisheries;
    Increasing dependence on technology which is becoming more resource (such as water) and energy intensive both directly (electricity and diesel for pumping water, power tillers and husking machines and in rice mills) and indirectly (e.g., use of urea produced with natural gas as basic raw material);
    Instability in growth of agriculture in general, more particularly in crop production and rice output with seasonal differentiation.
These characteristics are not new and over time have been sought to be counterbalanced through development and extension of new technologies, spread of irrigation and specific pricing and subsidy policies.
I would like to focus particularly on instability, the last of the mentioned characteristics. The rates of growth as described earlier will not make it clear. For that one needs to look at the year to year fluctuations in the rate of growth for recent years.
Takin agriculture as a whole and only the crops and the fisheries as sub-sectors - crop cultivation has shown substantial fluctuation from year to year. GDP of crops has grown in some years only as less than 1 percent to as high as 7-8 percent in some years, while agriculture which broadly mimics crops in pattern has grown at rates between 2-3 to 6 percent. But of even more interest is the observation that while both crops and fisheries showed good promise to begin with, over the years there had been perceptible decline in their performance and subsequently in agriculture as a whole.
Except for a short-lived spurt over 2009-10 or thereabout, both crops and agriculture as a whole had been a story of continuous decline in year-to-year rate of growth. Fisheries also experienced sharp falls from earlier years but later held on. These fluctuations are of particular interest because over the years since 2009 or so, there had been no major natural hazards such as big floods, cyclonic storms or major wide-ranging droughts. Furthermore there had been some good policies such as absolute and relative decline in prices of non-urea fertiliser and relative rise in urea prices very possibly leading to a better balanced use of fertiliser that is conducive to soil health.
The fluctuations in agriculture and its subs-sectors - particularly crops - have been mirrored somewhat by that in the output of main staple rice. Rice output, it is well known now, depends by and large on the dry-period irrigated boro and rain-fed aman. In 2012-13, boro accounted for roughly 55 and aman 38 percent of total output of nearly 34 million mt. But both exhibit substantial year to year fluctuations, aman more so in downswings and boro counterbalancing those by upswings. Aman's fluctuations are caused mainly by natural factors related to climate-related events such as drought, floods and cyclonic storms along the coast. Note further that over the years while boro expanded and replaced aush substantially, aman acreage more or less remained unchanged because the seasonal and other environmental niche it occupies is well-suited to its cultivation. In any case, despite it being subjected to various natural hazards, aman output is an important key to food security on two accounts: First because it accounts for a major share of total output and that if it fails, even after a good boro harvest there is practically no major supply of rice from domestic production for a long period of 8-9 months. The same applies for failure of boro which, however, is less vulnerable to natural hazards and more amenable to suitable and timely policy interventions. Indeed, historically in greater Bengal, famines have always been preceded by major failures in aman output.   

CLIMATE CHANGE - THE NEW CHALLENGE
Against such a backdrop, a new challenge, climate change, has arisen. While this is not the place to go into any detail of what constitutes climate change and what may be the impact on Bangladesh agriculture, let it be stated that this is going to increase instability of agriculture in general in all its sub-sectors and particularly for crops and rice production due to the extremes of weather and the related natural hazards that are expected over the next several decades. Indeed, agriculture as we know now may cease to exist in the extreme case-scenario.  We already know that even at present conditions aman is very vulnerable to climate and climate-related events and disruption of aman will thus jeopardise food availability. In the future, climate related natural hazards may become more frequent and more severe, adversely affecting aman output. On the other hand, uncertainties of rainfall will also mean uncertainties regarding irrigation during boro season. Furthermore, if the regional warming becomes quite severe, boro will be adversely affected also due to temperature extremes. If either aman or boro or both substantially fail in a year, that will bring huge food insecurity, economic, social and ultimately political instability. There are two questions that may arise here. Firstly ,what needs to be done to avert such a menacing possibility and what has already been done and secondly, are we prepared to face such uncertainties as a nation?
To both the questions, the answer is that there is some progress in thinking and action but not enough. Instead of going into details, I would refer the interested reader to the relevant literature. But I would like to discuss the second issue briefly. There appears to be only a limited awareness of the urgency of the problem as manifested most glaringly in the policies of the country. This is possibly the main reason for the inadequate planning and investments for growth in agricultural and food production under climate variability and change.
In general, the broad policies, particularly the recent ones are sensitive, sometimes in a holistic manner, to climate change impacts and issues (e.g. Bangladesh Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan; Bangladesh Country Investment Plan for Food Security and Sixth Five year Plan). Unfortunately, such awareness has not been reflected in sectoral policies except the food policies. The National Agricultural Policy, 2013 (pertaining to crops) mentions climate change only cursorily - not as an issue of imminent importance. Two major policies related to livestock and fisheries are silent on the issue.
On the other hand, policies supportive of agriculture or affected by agriculture show limited attention or none at all to climate change, climate variability impacts or how inter-linkages will be impacted by climate change. Furthermore, while there is some awareness regarding food security under climate change, the concern remains confined by and large to staples such as rice. As in the case of non-crop agriculture, non-rice crops have also not been given attention regarding climate change impacts.
One particular issue that has been more or less completely bypassed by the policy makers in Bangladesh is the issue of mitigation or reduction of greenhouse gas emission. The various energy policies have been completely silent on this. Only the BCCSAP has given a clear message couching it as low emission development and including it in the Sixth Plan. While the guidelines on research and small scale irrigation policy highlight the need for ensuring water use efficiency and thus indirectly lowering the demand for energy and fossil-fuels and ultimately lowering greenhouse gas emission, no direct mention of mitigation has been made. Nor hace the issues of water efficiency and related methane emission reduction been highlighted. The issue of nitrous oxide emission due to use of nitrogenous fertiliser has been completely lost sight of while at the same time lamenting heavier than necessary use of urea has been brought up in some of these policies.
One of the reasons behind the lack of or limited awareness may be the so called Rules of Business of the government which specify the mandates of each ministry. Under such Rules of Business, climate change is a matter under the purview of the Ministry of Environment and Forests. With greater global and national understanding of the climate change processes and their impact on the development process, the mandate should have been broadened to include other arms of the government. This has been lacking and may have resulted in the mismatch between the broader frameworks and policies, and the sectoral (i.e. ministry-specific) ones.


The writer is a Professorial Fellow at the Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies. He may be reached at asaduzzaman.m@gmail.com
Published: 12:00 am Tuesday, March 10, 2015

Leather goods: Relocation issue By Suman Saha

Star ARCHIVE
Source: Star ARCHIVE
Bangladesh's effort to emerge as a major leather products exporting nation is not getting momentum due to long dilly-dallying over the relocation of polluting tanneries from the capital to Savar. 
The move to shift hazardous tanneries from Dhaka's Hazaribagh to Savar took off in 2003, but it did not become a reality in the last one decade mainly due to the procrastination on the part of the tanneries.Their reluctance even prompted the government to threaten them with cancellation of the allotment of plots it has distributed to the tanneries. 
Tanners now say that the June 2015 is a difficult deadline to meet for tannery relocation mainly due to shortage of fund and time span. However, Industries Minister Amir Hossain Amu has already warned against delay in relocation, threatening to cancel the plot allotment for those who do not meet the deadline. The parliamentary standing committee on the industries ministry also echoed the same.
“We need soft loan for relocation as tanners are going through liquidity crisis,” says Md Shaheen Ahmed, chairman of Bangladesh Tanners Association (BTA). Tannery owners will have to invest around Tk 5,600 crore to establish new plants and begin commercial production, he added.
“We are sincere in our efforts to relocate tanneries soon. But we need access to low-cost funds as leather is a capital-intensive industry,” said M Abu Taher, chairman of Bangladesh Finished Leather, Leather Goods and Footwear Exporters' Association. He called upon the government, especially Bangladesh Bank, to take necessary steps to arrange soft loans for the tanners.
Shaheen Ahmed said most tannery owners will be able to start the relocation if the government arranges loan at a 5 percent interest rate and disburses the compensation money of Tk 250 crore immediately. Some analysts however said demanding soft loan is a weak excuse to delay the tannery relocation further.
The government has already provided a number of incentives to tanners such as allotting plots at subsidised rates, giving out power and gas connections and bearing the construction cost of the central effluent treatment plant at the new Savar Leather Industrial Park, they said.
 The industries ministry has already allocated plots on the 200-acre leather estate to 155 tannery owners through Bangladesh Small and Cottage Industries Corporation, a wing of the industries ministry that is implementing the project.
Some 148 tannery owners have so far begun building their factories in Savar, according to Md Sirajul Haider, project director of the Industrial Estate.“But most tanners have so far only built boundary walls and guard sheds,” he said adding that just 40 companies have made multi-storey buildings at the estate.
 Some industry people says the industries ministry has made a mistake in the case of allocating plots in the Savar Industrial Estate as it has distributed plots only to those who have tanneries in Hazaribagh.   “Tanner relocation would have been much earlier if the government kept plots open for all,” said a noted leather goods exporter wishing not to be named.
 Saiful Islam, senior vice president of Leather Goods and Footwear Manufacturers and Exporters Association of Bangladesh, said tanneries need to be relocated as soon as possible for the sake of the environment and exports. Many international buyers are not giving orders to Bangladesh mainly due to a long delay of the tannery relocation, said Islam, also managing director ofPicard Bangladesh, a leading leather goods exporter.
 "Bangladesh will be able to earn at least USD 5 billion in exports from leather, leather goods and footwear annually by 2018 if it can properly address environment and compliance issues and give policy support for higher value added products in the sector by this year," he said. The leather sector is quite similar to the garment sector, but the scope of value addition is far greater.
 The value addition in the sector is close to 90 percent as opposed to 40 percent in the garments sector, said Sobur Ahmed, an assistant professor of the Institute of Leather Engineering and Technology.
 The industrial estate project took off in 2003 with a Tk 175.75 crore fund, and the cost has gone up by 98 percent to Tk 1,079 crore over the decade since its launch. The amount includes Tk 250 crore as government compensations to the tanners.
Initially, it was planned that the 155 tanneries would finance 60 percent of the costs and the government the rest. Later the government has agreed to bear 80 percent of the core project cost: Tk 829 crore.
 Bangladesh has a long history of leather business. The country's first tannery was set up at Narayanganj in 1940s, and large scale production started in 1970s. The country has now some 3,500 micro, small and medium enterprises and 110 large firms in the sector. About 95 percent of leather and leather products are sold abroad, said Islam of Picard Bangladesh.
The country has now around 50 foreign footwear and leather goods companies. Their investment totals USD 210 million, and they have created jobs for 30,342 local people.
Bangladesh exported USD 662.88 million in leather, leather goods and non-leather footwear between July and December last year, up 6.85 percent year-on-year, according to the Export Promotion Bureau. The sector's exports rose 32.12 percent year-on-year to a record USD 1.29 billion last fiscal year.
 Of the total exports from the leather industry, 60 percent go to the European Union, 30 percent to Japan and 10 percent to the rest of the world, according to industry insiders.
 The industry, which has grown on local raw materials, has emerged as the second largest export earner after garments. Bangladesh's leather exports however account for just 0.56 percent of the global leather and leather goods market worth around USD230 billion.


The writer is a business reporter, The Daily Star.
Published: 12:00 am Tuesday, March 10, 2015

Privatising government owned enterprises By Md. Rizwanul Islam

Illustration: Internet
Illustration: Internet
Following the worldwide pattern of a limited role of government in industrial and commercial activities and divesting of government owned enterprises into private hands; Bangladesh too has been doing this for decades. Nevertheless, by now it is more or less a common wisdom that the Privatisation Commission, the statutory body responsible for steering privatisation in Bangladesh is sitting like a lame duck. During the 22 years of the combined existence of the Privatisation Board (the predecessor of the Privatisation Commission) and the Privatisation Commission, less than 80 state owned enterprises (SOEs) have been privatised.
Where SOEs have been privatised, allegations of undervaluation of its assets galore and it is particularly well-known that vesting the ownership of SOEs to their preferred private groups was a common technique of creating a political class favourable to the military rulers in this country. It is also well documented that many of the privatised enterprises have been closed down by their owners following their de-nationalisation, destroying workers' jobs and making no real contribution to an effective management of the businesses. A study report on privatised industries in Bangladesh conducted by the Privatisation Commission in 2010 found that only 59 percent of the privatised entities were in operation after their privatisations and 20 percent of them were permanently closed down – implying lack of planning or business motivation of their private owners.
Photo: Internet
Photo: Internet
Now that in 2014 the government declared that SOEs would not be handed over to private owners by direct selling, a viable way for ensuring greater accountability of the management of the SOEs and minimising the government's exposure to commercial activities can be to ensure the offloading of shares of SOEs. The offloading of shares in an SOE, unless it involves more than 50 percent of its shares, does not divest the government of the control over the enterprise. But such offloading of shares in SOEs can help enterprises to be leaner, nimbler, more accountable, and more competitive. Generally, the interest of the management of an SOE is not aligned with the performance of the enterprise and this trouble can be reduced by including the private shareholders in the board of the enterprise after offloading of shares takes place.
Offloading of shares can also inject capital into an enterprise which may be used for the necessary expansion of its operation without draining the public coffer. The higher rate of non-performing loans in state owned banks compared to their private counterparts would be testament to the comparative lack of accountability and efficiency of the management of SOEs. The commitment to cater for the needs of customers also varies between fully owned government enterprises and enterprises which are fully or partially owned by private entities.
An advantage of offloading of a percentage of shares in the SOEs is that unlike their complete selling, this may have a less drastic effect on the wages and other conditions of work of employees of the enterprise and may face less antagonism from them. A comparative advantage of offloading shares of SOEs over the outright sale of enterprises is that the valuation in this case would generally be more market driven and thus, the scope for manipulating the valuation of the enterprises is much more restrained. The offloading of shares of SOEs is also important from the viewpoint of investors in the stock market. It can boost the supply of quality shares in the capital market and play a role in stemming the overheating of the stock market. The offloading of less than controlling shares of an SOE can also allow the government a chance of experimentation with its management mechanism and decide on the pros and cons of its eventual disinvestment in private hands.
The progress of offloading shares of SOEs is bleak in Bangladesh. Sometimes the Privatisation Commission has taken the decision to offload shares of an SOE, but due to the non-cooperation of the management of the concerned enterprise or the relevant Ministry controlling the enterprise, the process has not occurred for a very long time. A state-owned company, Teletalk can be a prime example of this type of long delay. As per the statement of the then Minister for Finance

and Planning made in the Parliament in June 2005, a decision in principle, to offload shares of Teletalk was taken at the time. Ministers of the current regime have at various points of time reiterated their desire to proceed with this decision but it still remains to be implemented. The offloading of government held shares in multinational corporations in Bangladesh has also not gained any momentum.
The Privatisation Policy, 2007 entrusts the Privatisation Commission with the responsibility to steer the process of privatisation of SOEs. However, despite this mandate, the Privatisation Commission, with its unremitting deficiency in manpower has not been able to perform its functions as a statutory body to any satisfactory degree as is epitomised by its admission of the slow pace of privatisation. It is not just the lack of steam in the process, but also an apparent lack of co-ordination between the Privatisation Commission on the one hand and the SOEs and the relevant Ministries on the other which is quite worrying. In other words, if there were any reasoned policy considerations (such as a better prospect of profit making through re-design or some sort of structural reform or simply some sort of preponderant public interest justifying the continuance of an SOE in its existing structure despite its economic inefficiency) stymieing the process of offloading the shares of SOEs, that could have been welcomed. However, such diagnostic factors based analysis seems to be absent in the process.
While the concern of investors giving them a cold shoulder or the securities regulator not approving their proposed initial public offering (IPO) may inhibit the non-profitable SOEs from offloading shares through IPOs; the reason of other SOEs do not appear to be driven by any consideration of justifiable economic reasons. In fact, as many investors in the stock market suffer from the syndrome of irrational exuberance about IPOs and are guided by perception rather than sound financial consideration; in any case, loss making companies are not and should not be allowed by the securities regulator to raise capital by offloading their shares to ordinary investors. Many financial analysts have observed that any IPO of quality shares of substantial volume have been a rarity in the stock market of Bangladesh. And the offloading of shares by SOEs can be a welcome exception to that.
The government has decided to form a new authority, possibly to be named 'Bangladesh Investment and Industrial Development Authority', replacing the existing Board of Investment and Privatisation Commission. It is expected that the proposed body would act to bring vitality in drawing more foreign direct investment to Bangladesh. Whether or not this objective would be materialised is an uncertain proposition. However, it is quite certain that without removing the bureaucratic red tapes, the restructuring of the Privatisation Commission would have limited impact on the process of offloading of shares in SOEs. It would be apparent that despite granting greater powers to the Privatisation Commission than its predecessor, there has not been any significant advancement in its performance.
Offloading of shares of SOEs, in one way or the other would, mean limiting the sphere of powers of the public servants. For this reason, unless the political leadership can dictate the process and push it through, the bureaucracy would naturally try to engage in dithering and delaying tactics. As Thomas L. Friedman, an acclaimed author has written, “If horses could have voted, there would never have been cars,” the political leadership of this country would have to force the unwilling horses (the management of SOEs) to make way for the much more efficient cars (a management structure in SOEs where private owners would be a part - be that a controlling or simply a sizeable one).

The writer is an Assistant Professor at School of Law, BRAC University.
Published: 12:00 am Tuesday, March 10, 2015

AD BANNAR