印尼可可產業競爭力分析

Competitive Performance of Indonesian Cocoa Industry

狄安娜(Andi Asdiana Ekasari)

指導教授 ： 鍾惠雯

國立屏東科技大學/國際學院/熱帶農業暨國際合作系/碩士(2019年)

https://doi.org/10.6346/NPUST201900274

摘要

本研究目的是利用顯示性比較優勢指數（RCA）、顯示性貿易優勢指數（RTA）、比較出口績效指數（CEP）和市佔指數（MSI）來分析印度尼西亞可可產業的競爭表現。研究對1997-2017年的貿易數據進行評估，發現儘管印度尼西亞可可產業然落後於象牙海岸共和國、迦納和喀麥隆三個非洲國家，但其在全球市場上仍具有競爭力。RCA與RTA分析顯示與印度尼西亞相比下，荷蘭的競爭力較低而德國則無競爭優勢，CEP分析結果顯示三個非洲國家非常有競爭力，印度尼西亞和荷蘭亦具競爭力但未及三個非洲國家，而德國在全球可可市場上的競爭力則較低。自1997年起，印尼可可產業的競爭表現不穩且有下滑趨勢。儘管累計至2010年後呈現大幅下降，其可可加工產品在全球市場仍具競爭力，其中可可脂最具競爭優勢。MSI分析顯示，印度尼西亞可可產品在美國受青睞程度高於法國和日本。此外，回歸數據分析結果指出印度尼西亞可可產業的競爭表現受到國內價格、出口稅、世界可可庫存和印度尼西亞可可出口量的影響較為顯著。

關鍵字

可可豆 ； 加工可可 ； 顯示性比較優勢指數（RCA） ； 顯示性貿易優勢指數（RTA） ； 比較出口績效指數（CEP） ； 市佔指數（MSI）

並列摘要

The trade theories support that countries should specialize in the production and exportation of products that they have relatively abundant factor endowments or a comparative advantage. Therefore, Indonesia has taken the advantage to become the third largest producer of cocoa beans in the world. It is also the leading foreign exchange earner in Indonesia. Thus, the importance of this commodity to the country cannot be overstated. The objective of this study is to analyze the competitive performance of Indonesian cocoa industry. Competitiveness in this study is defined as the ability of the Indonesian cocoa industry to sustain trade in the global market. The 1997-2017 trade data from International Trade Center (ITC) and United Nations Commodity Trade (UN Comtrade) databases have been evaluated using Revealed Comparative Advantage Index (RCA), Revealed Trade Advantage Index (RTA), Comparative Export Performance Index (CEP) and Market Share Index (MSI) to determine the performance of Indonesian cocoa industry.

The results of RCA analysis found that, in general, Ivory Coast, Ghana and Cameroon have comparative advantage and more competitive in exporting cocoa than Indonesia; Netherlands has low comparative advantage while Germany has comparative disadvantage over Indonesia. While CEP measurement has placed Ivory Coast, Ghana and Cameroon in a highly competitive position, Indonesia and Netherlands are found to be competitive while Germany has low competitiveness in the global cocoa market. These results suggest that African competitors have higher degree of specialization and above-average export growth which made them more competitive in the global cocoa market
Based on the RTA analysis, it shows that from 1997 onwards, the Indonesian cocoa industry experienced unstable competitive performance levels with a downward trend. In spite of the fact that the competitive performance of the Indonesian cocoa bean has significantly declined after 2010, yet remained competitive in the global market through its processed cocoa commodities, among them, cocoa butter has shown to have the highest competitive advantage. Indeed, the results of RTA identified Indonesian cocoa industry into two competitiveness periods; it started with a medium competitive advantage in 1997-2013, and then decreased sharply during 2014-2017 to become weakly competitive. These might be attributed to declining export quantity, low quality and trade policy (Lubis and Nuryanti, 2011; Nabhani, 2015; Rifin, 2015).
The results of MSI reveal that Indonesia has a better performance in US than in France and Japan. Overall, the results from the competitiveness indexes discussed in this study, RCA, RTA, and CEP, all show that African competitors (Ivory Coast, Ghana and Cameroon) are more competitive in the global cocoa market than European competitors (Netherlands and Germany). Furthermore, from the regression analysis addressed on cocoa bean, it confirms the findings from the existing literature that export tax would barricade the export competitiveness, while both export volume and world cocoa stock would promote it. However, the impact of domestic price of cocoa bean is found to be positive on export competitiveness which is not in accordance with the previous studies.
The export environment for Indonesian cocoa industry is dynamic and changing. The results of this study reveal that there is a need for a comprehensive and balanced strategy implemented to Indonesian cocoa industry to strengthen its current competitiveness level. As the third largest cocoa producers, Indonesia should have the potential to further enhance its comparative advantage in the global cocoa market. The urgent tasks are to increase productivity and continuously improving quality. Indonesia should further cultivate its cocoa butter industry given that cocoa butter is found to be competitively advantageous in the global market. Hence, the country must take initiatives to shift from currently dominant upstream activities to downstream activities with higher value-added products. Furthermore, to enhance export competitiveness, measures should be put in place to adjust domestic prices into a profitable level for farmers through subsidy, fixed farm gate prices, and buffer stock management; review the implementation of tax policy on cocoa bean; build a favorable environment for creating and maintaining competitive activities; as well as collaborate with other exporters to maintain an effective global supply control.

並列關鍵字

Indonesian cocoa ； comparative advantage ； RCA ； RTA ； CEP ； MSI

參考文獻

Abbas, S. and A. Waheed. 2017. Trade Competitiveness of Pakistan: The Revealed Comparative Advantage Approach. An International Business Journal DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/CR-12-2015-0092.

Abdikoglu, D. I. 2016. Analysis of Competitiveness of Turkey in the International Olive Oil Market. Journal of Agricultural Faculty of Uludag University 30: 55-59.

Abei, L. 2017. An Analysis of the Competitive Performance of the Cameroonian Cocoa Industry. Retrieved on Oct. 21, 2018, from the World Wide Web: https://scholar.sun.ac.za/handle/10019.1/102984.

Akbar, F. 2015. Trade Policy Analysis of Indonesian Cocoa Industry. Master Thesis. National Chung Hsing University.

Alidou, M., R. F. Ceylan, and E. Ilbasmis. 2017. Trade and Revealed Comparative Advantage Measures: A Case of Main Export Crops of Benin Republic. Journal of Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences 18(1):382-397.