EWFIS-40
Market Structure and Price Determination of
Foodgrains in Bangladesh*
Naser Farid1
Dr. M. Sayedur Rahman2
________________________________________________________________
1Project Director
2Agricultural Statistics Specialist
Early Warning and Food Information System Project
Ministry of Food
September 2002
*
The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official position of
the Government of Bangladesh.
Executive Summary
Prices play a central role in economic theory in guiding production and consumption.
Consumers are likewise influenced in their decisions by advertising, the display space given
to foods in supermarkets, personal whims, packaging and convenience as well as by prices.
The pricing decisions, whether made on the basis of market forces or political considerations
have important economic consequences. For this reason, tools of analysis that will help one to
anticipate the economic effects of pricing decisions are still important. Farmers, marketing
and supply firms and government officials have to make many decisions that require a
knowledge of what will happen if the price of a particular commodity rises or falls. Price in
terms of level and frequency of change varies with the type of market structure. Markets may
be classified as competitive (many buyers and sellers), Oligopolistic (new firms) or
monopolistic (a single firm). Another category that is sometimes used is monopolistic
competition (many firm selling similar but differentiated products. Rice is the predominant
crop, covering 75% of the cropped area and accounting for 70% of the value of crop output.
The production of supply of sufficient food is one side of food security while the other
pivotal side is entitlement of all, primarily of the poor, marginal and disadvantaged people to
available foods in a given space and time. It is essentially a match of required production and
marketable quarantines for a given population against their entitlement to such foods,
Therefore, the market played a vital role in achieving food security for the poor and marginal,
because, the market determines the availability as well as the price of food grains.
Price performance under alternative market structures is difficult to appraise.
Competitive prices are likely to change more frequently and may fluctuate more violently
than those established and maintained under conditions of monopoly or oligopoly.
Economists lend to prefer competitive pricing to monopoly pricing. There is a greater
possibility of farmers being exploited when only a single buyer or a few outlets are available
in a local area. But it is difficult to determine empirically whether or not farmers are being
charged higher prices for the things they buy or are being offered lower prices for what they
sell than would prevail with a larger number of sellers and buyers.
In forecasting production, an understanding of the prices to which farmers respond is
important. For most commodities, except those grown under contract, product prices are
uncertain at planting time. Expected future prices may be based on recent past prices, average
prices over a period of years, current prices for the distant delivery of a commodity as
ii
observed on an organized futures market, government price-support levels, or outlook
statements. For some commodities, there is considerable empirical evidence to suggest that
future production plans are based on current prices. It this relationship persist, a cycle of
alternating high and low production may develop, with corresponding changes in prices. High
prices in one year will lead to high production and low prices in the following year, which
will then induce a cutback in production the next year.
The market plays a very vital role in achieving food security, because it is the market,
which determines the availability as well as the price. Even though there is money in the
hands of the people, non-availability of foodgrains would shot the price up beyond the
consumer's reach. On the other hand, even of there are huge stocks in the market, the lack of
purchasing power would make it impossible for the people to buy. Market failure sometimes
causes disruption and such failure leads to non-availability as well as higher price. Besides
market, the distribution system also plays a vital role for enhancing greater access to food by
the poor. The market and the PFDS have important links. More research needed to identify
the appropriate role of the government in providing or facilitating the development of those
institutions that are necessary to promote agricultural markets and rural income growth. The
types of institutions needed can be classified into four main categories: (1) market related
institutions such as cooperatives, farmers and traders associations, credit clubs, contract
farming, etc., (2) institutional infrastructure such as roads, communication networks,
commodity exchanges, storage facilities, market information services, etc., (3) regulatory
institutions such as laws regarding market conduct and enforcement of contracts, ownership
rules and property rights, grades and standards, etc., and (4) government and political
institutions that have the capacity to monitor the emergence of markets and support their
development. Finally suggested to improving rural commutation for better transportation of
goods and that would certainly benefit the locality as well as community.
The study tried to explore to two interrelated areas mainly market structure and price
determination of foodgrain in relation to achieving food security for the poor and marginal
people. The study suggested policy responses for improving the market, price stabilization
and the PFDS. This study will help identify the types of public policies needed for the
development of competitive and efficient agro-based markets that can contribute in reducing
rural poverty and promoting agricultural economic growth in the country.
iii
List of Contents
Executive Summary
List of Contents
List of Tables
List of Figures
1.
Introduction
2.
Market Structure and Price
2.1
Agricultural Commodity Prices and Its Role in Economy
3.
Spatial Distribution of the Rice Marketing System
3.1
The Scenario of Marketing Channels
3.2
Functional Variety of Marketing Process in Private Sector
3.2.1
Market Chain for Rice
3.3
Marketing System in Public Sector
4.
Foodgrain Price and Its Distribution by the Public Sector
5.
Conclusions and Recommendations
References
Appendix
iv
List of Tables
Table-1: Scenario of Per Capita Food Grain Production of Bangladesh.
Table-2: Structural scenario changes in rice market of Bangladesh.
Table-3: Shares of various channels in PFDS offtakes of wheat.
Table-4: Food Grain Imports and Total PFDS Intake Scenario of Bangladesh.
Table-5: Distribution Scenario and Availability of Food Grain of Bangladesh.
Table-6a: Commodity-wise Export Handled at Chittagong & Mongla Ports.
Table-6b: Commodity-wise Export Handled at Chittagong & Mongla Ports.
Table-7a: Commodity-wise Import Handled at Chittagong & Mongla ports.
Table-7b: Commodity-wise Import Handled at Chittagong & Mongla ports.
Table-8: Truck Cost Price from Dinajpur to Dhaka and Chittagong.
Table-9: Annual Cost for Truck for Mymensingh to Dhaka.
Appendix Table1a: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in
Aman Season of Dinajpur, Rangpur, Bogra and Rajshahi Market during the
Period of 1980-81 to 2001-02.
Appendix Table1b: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in
Aman Season of Pabna, Kushtia, Jessore and Khulna Market during the
Period of 1980-81 to 2001-02.
Appendix Table1c: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in
Aman Season of Barisal, Patuakhali, Mymensingh and Kishoreganj during the
Period of 1980-81 to 2001-02.
Appendix Table1d: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in
Aman Season of Jamalpur, Tangail, Faridpur and Dhaka Market during the
Period of 1980-81 to 2001-02.
Appendix Table1e: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in
Aman Season of Sylhet, Comilla, Noakhali and Chittagang Market during the
Period of 1980-81 to 2001-02.
Appendix Table1f: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in
Aman Season of Rangamati, Khagrachari and Bandarban Market during the
Period of 1980-81 to 2001-02.
Appendix Table2a: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Aus
Season of Dinajpur, Rangpur, Bogra and Rajshahi Market during the Period
of 1980-81 to 2001-02.
v
Appendix Table2b: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Aus
Season of Pabna, Kushtia, Jessore and Khulna Market during the Period of
1980-81 to 2001-02.
Appendix Table2c: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Aus
Season of Barisal, Patuakhali, Mymensingh and Kishoreganj during the Period
of 1980-81 to 2001-02.
Appendix Table2d: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Aus
Season of Jamalpur, Tangail, Faridpur and Dhaka Market during the Period
of 1980-81 to 2001-02.
Appendix Table2e: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Aus
Season of Sylhet, Comilla, Noakhali and Chittagang Market during the Period
of 1980-81 to 2001-02.
Appendix Table2f: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Aus
Season of Rangamati, Khagrachari and Bandarban Market during the Period
of 1980-81 to 2001-02.
Appendix Table3a: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Boro
Season of Dinajpur, Rangpur, Bogra and Rajshahi Market during the Period
of 1980-81 to 2001-02.
Appendix Table3b: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Boro
Season of Pabna, Kushtia, Jessore and Khulna Market during the Period of
1980-81 to 2001-02.
Appendix Table3c: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Boro
Season of Barisal, Patuakhali, Mymensingh and Kishoreganj during the Period
of 1980-81 to 2001-02.
Appendix Table3d: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Boro
Season of Jamalpur, Tangail, Faridpur and Dhaka Market during the Period
of 1980-81 to 2001-02.
Appendix Table3e: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Boro
Season of Sylhet, Comilla, Noakhali and Chittagang Market during the Period
of 1980-81 to 2001-02.
Appendix Table3f: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Boro
Season of Rangamati, Khagrachari and Bandarban Market during the Period
of 1980-81 to 2001-02.
vi
List of figures
Fig.1: Changing supply-price relationships through time.
Fig.2: Wheat marketing operation channels in Bangladesh
Fig.3: Rice marketing operation channels in Bangladesh
vii
Market Structure and Price Determination of
Foodgrains in Bangladesh
By
Naser Farid & Dr. M. Sayedur Rahman
1.
Introduction
Agriculture is the single most important sector of the economy. The crop sector, in
particular food crops (mainly rice and wheat), plays a dominant role and represents about
76% of the value added in agriculture, although the share of non-crop agriculture, particularly
livestock and fisheries has increased steadily in recent years. Rice is the predominant crop,
covering 75% of the cropped area and accounting for 70% of the value of crop output. The
production of supply of sufficient food is one side of food security while the other pivotal
side is entitlement of all, primarily of the poor, marginal and disadvantaged people to
available foods in a given space and time. It is essentially a match of required production and
marketable quarantines for a given population against their entitlement to such foods,
Therefore, the market played a vital role in achieving food security for the poor and marginal,
because, the market determines the availability as well as the price of food grains.
The food grain marketing system has changed dramatically in Bangladesh over the
past several decades. While rice production doubled (Table-1 & 2) between the early 1960’s
and early 1990’s, the percentage of production that marketed rose from 10-14 percent to
nearly 50 percent, and market volume increased six-fold (Ninnon and Dorosh, 1998). In part,
this large increase in marketed production is due to the expansion of Boro HYV paddy, which
is harvested at the start of the monsoon season in May and June, and is thus difficult to store
(Chowdhury, 1992). About two-thirds of total farm sales take place at the farm level, rather
than in nearby markets. For small farmers, sales at farm gate are especially common in
regions with surplus per capita food grain production and / or high use of modern agricultural
inputs (Chowdhury, 1992). There is substantial evidence that private rice markets are, in
general, highly competitive (Islam et al., 1985; Chowdhury, 1992), though in some regions
which are geographically isolated during rainy season, there is evidence that small numbers
of traders collude to the detriment of small farmers (Crow and Morshid, 1990). The overall
scenario that emerges is one of robust growth and increasingly competitive rice and paddy
markets.
2
Table-1: Scenario of Per Capita Food Grain Production of Bangladesh.
Financial Estimated
Year
Population
(‘000)
Grain Production (‘000
Tons)
FY57-60 Avg
47550
7796
24
7821
7016
21
7038
148.01
FY61-65 Avg
54014
9701
36
9737
8731
31
8763
162.24
FY66-70 Avg
62777
10567
69
10636
9510
62
9572
152.48
FY71-75 Avg
71995
10700
107
10808
9630
96
9727
135.11
FY76-80 Avg
82639
12464
390
12855
11218
351
11569
139.99
FY80-85 Avg
93958
14037
1157
15195
12633
1041
13675
145.54
FY86-90 Avg
104730
15852
1018
16870
14266
916
15183
144.97
FY91-95 Avg
115000
17864
1124
18988
16078
1011
17078
148.60
1995-96
121000
17688
1369
19057
15919
1232
17151
141.75
1996-97
123000
18882
1454
20336
16994
1309
18302
148.80
1997-98
125000
18862
1803
20665
16976
1623
18599
148.79
1998-99
127000
19905
1908
21813
17915
1717
19632
154.58
1999-2000
129000
23067
1840
24907
20760
1656
22416
173.77
FY95-00 Avg
125000
19680
1674
21355
17712
1507
19220
153.76
Rice
Wheat
Total
Net Grain Production
(‘000 Tons)
Rice
Wheat
Production
Per Capita
(kg)
Total
Source: FPMU data, Ministry of Food.
Table-2: Structural scenario changes in rice market of Bangladesh.
1960’s
Variable
1970’s
1980’s
1990’
s
Production
Marketing
Distribution
Number of
Total (MMT)
10
12
15
18
Boro share (%)
7
18
26
37
HYV share (%)
1
23
36
58
As share of production (%)
12
27
34
49
Total marketed (MMT)
1
3
5
9
Marketing per capita (kg)
20
41
51
78
Public share of rice marketed (%)
30
15
11
7
Share marketed in the three largest urban centers (%)
-
40
-
20
Share sold on the farm to itinerant traders (%)
28
-
-
66
Itinerant traders
4000
-
-
48000
Millers
6155
11592
43691
50868
marketing
Automatic
0
3
66
88
agents
Major
106
152
251
480
Small huller
6049
11437
43374
50300
No. of months consumption requirements
1
-
-
3
Average storage time for trader stocks (months)
4
-
-
1
Private rice
stock
Source: Ninno and Dorosh (1998); Various issue of BBS; FPMU, Ministry of
Food.
3
The prices of agricultural commodities are important both economically and
politically because they strongly influence the level of farm incomes, the welfare of
consumers and in many countries, the amount of export carvings. The incomes of nearly half
the world's population are determined principally by the prices received for agricultural
commodities. A decline of only a few cents per pound in the prices of such internationally
traded commodities as sugar, coffee and cocoa can have serious political and economic
repercussions in such countries as Mauritius, Colombia and Ghana (Tomek and Robinson,
1995). In Bangladesh where agriculture accounts for one third of GDP and food prices are
politically sensitive.
2.
Market Structure and Price
Numerous empirical studies of the relationship between farm, wholesale and retail
prices have been undertaken (Heien, 1980, Hall et al., 1981; Lamm and Westcott, 1981;
Ward, 1982; Kinnucan and Forker, 1987). These studies have focused mainly on the lags
between changes in farm prices and changes in retail prices, although Lamm and Westcott
(1981) place special attention on other input prices. Empirical studies indicate that lags do
exist in price adjustments and that the length of lag is related to the amount of processing.
Lags and shortest for commodities, which are fresh eggs and longest for fats and oils and
processed fruits and vegetables (Hall et al., 1981; Westcott, 1986). Statistical tests typically,
but do not always, are consistent with causality running from changes in farm prices to
changes in retail prices. In the short run, changes in retail prices are more often related to
changes in farm-level supply than do changes in consumer demand.
Price in terms of level and frequency of change varies with the type of market
structure. Markets may be classified as competitive (many buyers and sellers), Oligopolistic
(new firms) or monopolistic (a single firm). Another category that is sometimes used is
monopolistic competition (many firm selling similar but differentiated products. A purely
competitive market is one in which the following conditions prevail:
(1)
The number of buyers and sellers is sufficiently large so that no individual can
perceptibly influence price by his or her decision to buy or sell.
(2)
The product is sufficiently homogeneous so that the product of one firm is
essentially a perfect substitute for that of another firm.
4
(3)
There are no artificial restrictions on demand, supply or prices, such as
government intervention or collusion among firms.
(4)
Mobility of resources and products exists in the economy; e.g., a new firm should
be free to enter the industry.
Price may be determined under conditions similar to those prevailing in competitive
markets even when the number of firms is small, provided entry and exist of firms is
relatively costless. Markets in which firms can exit or enter without incurring significant
costs are referred to in the literature relating to market structure as contestable markets
(Baumol, 1982; MacDonald, 1987). In a purely competitive market, it is assumed that every
producer-seller seeks to maximize profits by selling at as high a price as possible, and that
every buyer seeks to maximize utility by obtaining the product at as low a price as possible.
The collective actions of buyers and sellers determine prices.
Monopolistic competition refers to a market in which a larger number of sellers offer
a differentiated product. These products are presumably close substitutes, but the individual
sellers are able to differentiate their product on the basis of a trade name, style, quality,
service, location, or other factors. Consequently, the firm has some influence on price, but the
number of substitutes is likely to limit the firm's discretion in pricing. The demand relation
faced by the individual firms, while not perfectly elastic, is likely to be quite elastic in the
prevailing range of prices.
In real markets, sequential, binding trades are made with the passage of time based on
imperfect information. The average of these prices may not equal the true equilibrium or even
tend toward the equilibrium. Because true equilibrium prices are unobservable, it is difficult
to test for the relationship between them and transactions prices. Some experiments have
been conducted in an attempt to simulate reality. Hess (1972) and others found that under a
few experimental situations, the average of transactions prices was a biased estimate of the
equilibrium. Actual market prices approximate equilibrium prices in a purely competitive
market. There are at least two "model" of the relationship of transactions prices to the
theoretical equilibrium price. One view is that prices within a particular time period are
distributed about the true equilibrium for that time period. Thus, the average of transactions
prices is taken as equal to the equilibrium price. This is the implicit assumption of most
empirical studies that use average prices for a month, quarter or year in the analysis. In
essence, the reported average price is treated as and unbiased estimate of the true equilibrium
price. A second model views successive transactions as tending toward equilibrium.
5
Stockholders by storing at harvest and releasing stocks in later periods, reduce the
amplitude of price fluctuations. The agricultural commodity has and inelastic demand and a
supply that shifts from season to season. As a result, equilibrium prices for commodities such
as potatoes are highly variable from year to year. Various combinations of shifts in supply
and demand, and differences in slopes are possible. This helps explain why different
commodities have different degrees of price variability. In dynamic economy, the forces that
influence both the level and slope of demand and supply schedules are changing. Hence,
equilibrium price generally changes through time and structural changes in demand and
supply may occur as well.
Price theory in its simplest form assumes that buyers and sellers meet directly.
Equilibrium prices are determined by the aggregate demand and supply schedules of these
buyers and sellers. However, substantial research has been done in agricultural economics on
questions related to price differences between farmers and consumers. Nonetheless,
unanswered questions remain (Tomek and Robinson, 1995). The difference between the price
received by producers and that paid by consumers is a marketing margin. Both producers and
consumers are concerned about the size of marketing margins, changes in marketing margins,
and incidence of changes in margins. Among the questions frequently asked are the
following: Are marketing margins too large? Why do margins differ among products? How
have they changed with the passage of time? Are margins larger for small-sized crops than
for large-sized crops? If marketing costs increase, does this result in a higher consumer price
or a lower farm price, or both?
Marketing margins also are influenced by the willingness and ability of firms to adopt
cost-cutting techniques. In some market, supermarket operators may concentrate on sales
promotion; in others, they may seek to increase efficiency by taking advantage of inventory
management schemes and computer information technology. The net effect of changes in
market structure on pricing performance is difficult to assess. Consumers may not gain from
the potential benefits of lower-priced chain-store brands or generic foods it competition is
limited. Empirical studies indicate that prices typically average slightly higher in markets,
where concentration ratios are high (Marion et al., 1986).
A change in the marketing margin would be reflected through the marketing system in
an analogous way. Prices both at retail and at the farm would generally be affected. As an
example, let us assume that a transportation rate is reduced. The lower transportation rate
initially accrues to the benefit of the middlemen. However, the assumption of a purely
competitive market structure implied that the lower rate will be passed on to producers as
6
higher prices, to retailers as lower prices, or in general as a combination of the two effects.
The lower cost (hence higher profit) will induce existing middlemen to do more business and
will perhaps attract the entry of new middlemen. However, as they compete with each other
for more of the farm product, the result will be higher farm prices, and as they compete to sell
more to retailers, the result will be lower retail prices. Competition among retailers, which
gives the lower price, is passed on to consumers. Thus, the lower marketing cost affects both
farm and consumer prices.
Marketing margins for some farm products are determined under conditions that more
nearly conform to the oligopolistic model than to the purely competitive model. The attitude
or strategy of individual firms in price-cutting becomes a critical factor affecting retail prices.
The reluctance of firms to cut prices often leads to non-price competition. This can take the
form of offering rebates, gifts or prizes in an attempt to increase sales. Firms also may try to
gain a larger market stare by increasing advertising and promotion expenditures and by
differentiating their product. Muller (1983) argues that large firms are able to maintain and
even increase their market share in the food industry because they can afford to spend more
on advertising and promotion. The ability to dominate the media and to spend large sums on
developing new products gives such firms a competitive edge and makes it more difficult for
smaller firms to enter the market or to increase their market stare. This type of competition
prevails in the breakfast cereal industry and in a number of other sub-sectors of the food
industry as well (Nelson, 1966; Padberg, 1968).
Price performance under alternative market structures is difficult to appraise.
Competitive prices are likely to change more frequently and may fluctuate more violently
than those established and maintained under conditions of monopoly or oligopoly.
Economists lend to prefer competitive pricing to monopoly pricing. There is a greater
possibility of farmers being exploited when only a single buyer or a few outlets are available
in a local area. But it is difficult to determine empirically whether or not farmers are being
charged higher prices for the things they buy or are being offered lower prices for what they
sell than would prevail with a larger number of sellers and buyers. The economics of scale
may be sufficiently large that marketing costs may be lower with a small number of large
firms than with a large number of small competitors. Consumers perhaps gain from having
more choices and improved products, but they pay a price for a type of competition that leads
to product proliferation and high selling costs. Also, supermarkets are forced to carry more
items, which may lead to slower turnover for individual items and higher inventory costs.
Providing comparative price information to consumers apparently can enhance Price
7
competition, regardless of market structure. Devine and Marion (1979) found that provision
of such information by a public agency significantly reduced the average level of prices and
the dispersion of prices and the dispersion of prices in one market relative to a control
market.
2.1
Agricultural Commodity Prices and Its Role in Economy
Agricultural commodity prices are more volatile than are the prices of most non-farm
goods and services. The Biological nature of agricultural production is, of course, one
important cause of price instability. Unlike most non-farm industries, actual production in
agriculture may exceed or fall short of planned production by a considerable margin. Yields
vary from year to year because of unusually favorable or unfavorable weather and the
presence or absence of disease or insect infestations. Seasonal variations in production
likewise contribute to price instability from month to month. Relatively high or low prices
may persist for considerable periods because of the inability of farmers to respond promptly
to a change in price signals. The short run, agricultural commodity prices can overshoot longrun equilibrium levels in response to changes in economic forces, including responses to
macroeconomic variables (Andrews and Ransser, 1986). The long-term trend in rice
production however showed a cyclical pattern with a few years of growth followed by few
years of stagnation (Shahabuddin and Rahman, 1999). This was partly due to depression in
prices in seasons following consecutive good harvests providing disincentives to farmers to
further increase in production, and partly due to natural disasters, droughts and floods
(Mandal, 2000). Many agricultural markets have become move international in scope, thus
government policies can influence agricultural prices through their effect on both domestic
demand and trade. Production abroad also has a profound effect on the prices of food grains
in Bangladesh.
Prices play a central role in economic theory in guiding production and consumption.
Consumers are likewise influenced in their decisions by advertising, the display space given
to foods in supermarkets, personal whims, packaging and convenience as well as by prices.
The pricing decisions, whether made on the basis of market forces or political considerations
have important economic consequences. For this reason, tools of analysis that will help one to
anticipate the economic effects of pricing decisions are still important. Farmers, marketing
and supply firms and government officials have to make many decisions that require a
knowledge of what will happen if the price of a particular commodity rises or falls.
8
Market demand is defined in terms of the alternative quantities of a commodity that
all consumers in a particular market are willing and able to buy as price varies and as all other
factors are held constants. A market demand curve can be thought of as a summation of
individual demand relations. This includes consumers who enter the market as price declines
or who drop out at high prices. Thus a change in price influences the number of consumers as
well as the quantity each consumes. The demand for food and fiber products depends on a
host of socio-economic variables. The growing complexity and proliferation of food products
and the diversity of changes in socio-economic variables appear to have made demand
analysis more complex. Thus, much research has been done on the demands for foods and
fibers, much remains to be learned about the effects of individual variables on the demands
for specific foods (Tomek, 1985). Price theory suggests an inverse relationship between price
and quantity, but the inverse relationship by itself says nothing about the responsiveness of
quantity demanded to a price change for a commodity. This responsiveness is likely to vary
from commodity to commodity.
Very short
run
time
short
run
Price per unit
long run
P2
P1
Quantity per unit time
Fig.1: Changing supply-price relationships through time.
In very short run, once the crop is produced and harvested (assuming no reserve
stocks or imports and that the current crop cannot be stored), the supply function is a vertical
line. The quantity offered for sale can neither be increased nor decreased, regardless of the
9
price offered, until the next harvest comes in. Prior to harvest, the supply can be adjusted by
deciding not to harvest a part of the crop if the price is too low. As more time is allowed for
farmers to respond to price changes, production can be altered. In short run, the amount of
inputs such as fertilizer applied to crops or feeding rates for livestock can be varied, and in
the longer run, the area sown to crops and the number of livestock units can be changed. The
tendency for supply curves to become more responsive as more time is allowed for
adjustments is shown in Fig.1.
Two of the supply curves in Fig.1 have been extended to intersect the vertical axis. At
price P2, quantity supplied is positive in the short or intermediate run, but is zero in the long
run. That is the prices must cover fixed and variable costs in the long run. In contrast, price
need only cover variable costs in the short run for production to continue. Thus, the shorterrun function intersects the vertical axis at a price (P1) below that of the long run supply
curve.
The time dimension obviously is important in specifying supply relationships in
agriculture, but it is difficult to define precisely and unambiguously what is meant by the very
short run, the intermediate run, and the long run as applied to supply. The time required for a
production response varies from commodity to commodity. For forecasting purposes, one
would like to identify separately the short-run and long-run effects of a given price change,
but in practice it is difficult to separate these effects. The ultimate consequences of a single
price change can seldom be isolated because additional price changes will occur before the
effects of the first change are fully worked out, what one observes is the combined effect of
numerous price changes with varying degrees of lagged response (Tomek and Robinson,
1977).
In forecasting production, an understanding of the prices to which farmers respond is
important. For most commodities, except those grown under contract, product prices are
uncertain at planting time. Expected future prices may be based on recent past prices, average
prices over a period of years, current prices for the distant delivery of a commodity as
observed on an organized futures market, government price-support levels, or outlook
statements. For some commodities, there is considerable empirical evidence to suggest that
future production plans are based on current prices. It this relationship persist, a cycle of
alternating high and low production may develop, with corresponding changes in prices. High
prices in one year will lead to high production and low prices in the following year, which
will then induce a cutback in production the next year.
10
Changes in product prices shift the demand for factors up or down and this shift, in
turn, affects both factor prices and factor use. One of the critical variables that determine
whether a given change in product prices will affect mainly the price of the factor or the
quantity used is the shape of the factor supply schedule. However, if the factor supply
schedule is relatively flat, the major effect is to change use. In some cases, an increase or a
decrease in product prices can lead to an equivalent change in factor prices, while in other
cases factor prices are unresponsive to changes in product prices.
3.
Spatial Distribution of the Rice Marketing System
Markets vary in size and operation depending on the area in which they are situated.
Most of village markets are periodic while some of the larger semi-urban markets are open
for transactions six days of the week. The markets in the district of Barisal differ significantly
from those in the northern districts in that they are river based. Trans-actions take place
without necessitating unloading on the riverbank. Purchases are weighed on the boats and
transferred to the purchaser’s boats for shipment. In these markets head-loads and boats are
the most dominant and in many cases only means of transportation. On the other hand, the
markets ion the northern districts are usually served by head-loads and carts for arrivals and
train, trucks or carts for dispatches. The smaller rural markets do not have any storage
facilities at all.
The earliest link in the marketing chain is, of course, the farmer who sells his
commodities either in his home or at the nearest "hat". After the farmer-marketer, Baparis
and Farias, essentially traders or itinerant merchants are the most primary and basic
institution in the marketing system The intermediaries called Dalals and Aratdars, are
basically brokers and charge a fixed brokerage and commission from the transacting parties.
The Dalals usually connote a petty broker while the Aratdars are treated as large brokers
offering a variety of services ranging from storage facilities to short-term financing. Aratdars
and Dalals may operate in the same market and may even cooperate on sales. Aratdars are the
more important institution in the big urban, semi-urban and intermediate markets while the
Dalals are dominant feature in the smaller interior markets and possible in some mediumsized distribution centers. Although the government requires licensing of all traders, the total
number in government records is not an actual representation because a large number of
unlicensed small traders also operate in the various markets.
11
Almost all the rice that enters into the marketing channels is processed mechanically.
The large millers usually buy paddy and sell the basket rice directly to the Aratdars or
Beparies in the urban terminal markets. The smaller husking machines that are located in the
villages usually do custom husking and very seldom engage in the same type of buying and
selling practices as the large millers do. The Kutials usually buy paddy and after getting it
husked at the small commercial huskers sell it to the local Aratdar, if any, or to the Beparies.
About 80 percent of the total assemble in the small village "hats" is accounted for by
the growers for onward shipment to the higher tier of markets. At this level of transaction, the
Dalals play a dominant role in establishing contact between the buyers the sellers. In most
village and some intermediate markets the purchase and sale of paddy assumes a circular
pattern. Some local Farias buy paddy in one market day, get it dehusked and sell it in the next
market day and suie the sales priced toward the purchase of another supply of paddy.
Once the product moves to a bigger distributing market, the method of buying and
selling becomes substantially different than those prevailing in the village markets. The larger
intermediate markets are dominated by Aratdars. In these markets the "Bideshi" Beparies
come to the premises of the Aratdars, and put an indent for the quantity of rice they would
like to purchase. The Aratdars then assume all responsibility for the supply purchase. They
also assume the responsibilities of the comfort of the Aradtars shop for them. While the
"purchasers" rest, the employees of the Aratdars shop for them. Unless there is a very heavy
indent, most of the purchases are usually made on the premises of the Aratdars. The sellers
who are usually Farias, Beparies or Farmers, bring small samples of their products in wicker
containers. The Aratdars display the samples of rice they are willing to buy. Usually the
sellers shop different "arats" to appraise the market price. Once a deal has been settled, the
sellers bring the produce inside the "arat' where it is weighed sewed and sacked by the staff of
the Aratdars.
After the indented quantity has been purchased, the Aratdars make arrangements of
dispatch, which includes transport to the railway station or the boat pier, loading it and
completing the paper work. The Aratdars will keep the purchase in their stores without
charge if there is no transportation available. For these services the Aratdars usually charge a
commission both from the purchasers and the sellers.
The wholesale terminal markets in the urban centers are more Aratdar-centered than
the intermediate ones. In the intermediate markets there is the possibility that a small
incoming trader will buy directly from another small trader who has a small establishment on
the market. Terminal markets the Aratdars perform from the consuming centers make their
12
purchases from the Aratdars who charge a commission both from the seller and the purchase
(i.e., retailer).
The institution of the "Aratdari" seems to be an age-old one. Most of the Aratdars
have been engaged in this business for decades and at this time, they seem to be one of the
most important links in the whole marketing chain. In recent times the Aratdars have
diversified their business by also dealing in rice trading on their own account. They get
supplies from interior markets by sending a request to fellow Aratdars there. It seems that
their own purchases and sales, and operation as commissioned agents are of equal proportion.
There is no doubt that the working relationship between the traders and the Aratdars has
shown remarkable stability over the decades and that it is deeply ingrained in the institutional
frame-work of the marketing system. The belief that such functional intermediaries are
superfluous and thrive at the cost of traders and consumers do not appear to be the real
situation.
It seems that there is a tremendous amount of trust amount the Beparies and the
Aratdars. Beparies trust that the Abraders will always try to give them the best deal;
paradoxically so do the other parties that deal through the Abraders. Success lies in the
intelligent manipulation of both and not exploitation. This is due to several factors. With the
existing facilities available in the primary and secondary markets, the Beparies would have a
hard time even in stock-pilling their purchases in order to prepare them for dispatch. The
Aratdars provide a convenient place for this purpose and even assure that in the event of
transportation bottlenecks, their purchases will have a shelter. Second, the Beparies do not
feel that they could move around with security in the unfamiliar markets because they have to
carry sums of money with them. Third, the Beparies feel that Aratdars know the local traders
and market conditions better and as such would be able to give them a better deal. Fourth,
very often the Aratdars will finance their clients' purchases if it is so required. Finally, the
Beparies enjoy the hospitality offered by the Aratdars after travelling to the market. Since the
traders depend upon the Aratdars so heavily, they are willing to pay anywhere of the gross
value of their sales/purchases in commission to the Aratdars.
Kutials are possible the most important functionaries performing the two early stages
of processing, namely, parboiling and drying. This is a group of landless laborers or some
small landholders who buy paddy from the market and parboil and dry them on the yard of
their own-household. Usually parboiling is done through the night (particularly during the
peak of the season) or during the late hours. After it has been sundried the following day, hey
take it to the rice huskers. While some Kutials acquire ownership of the commodity and thus
13
earn all profits accruing from the truncation, other Kutials contract with some paddy-cumrice merchants for fixed allowances.
The large rice mills integrate all these three stage of rice processing (except for the
mills in Sylhet and Chittagong where the first two stages are skipped because of consumer
preferences). Rice millers purchases paddy and after processing they sell it to the wholesalers
at the terminal markets. In recent times there has been a very rapid growth of small husking
machines engages in custom husking. There are, however, a large number who do this, as
well as have own business of purchasing paddy and selling the processed rice. However, they
do not have the same equipment for parboiling as the millers have.
In the first stage of the marketing chain of food grain mode of transportation of small
farmers carrying their produce normally on their head load, shoulder sting, cycle, pony back,
Some place rickshaw vans and rickshaw are used to carry food grain to the market. In the
secondary markets the traders (inter mediates) carrying their produce by rickshaw, rickshaw
van, small truck, push cart and if the market is near the river the produce carrying by boat
(machine), cargo boat and also by launch to the mills and also to the godown/warehouses. In
the 3rd stage the produce carrying mainly by truck in the highway, in the waterways by boat,
machine boat, cargo vessels etc. and in the cargo train to the urban wholesale centers of the
country. Truck carried more than 50% food grain to the wholesale market. Because of lots of
limitation in the waterways the most common and usual and rather also cheaper transport was
played very important role for transportation of products has become less important in the
recent years. In the urban wholesale markets the retail traders use different type of transport
i.e. rickshaw/van, mini-truck, sometime their own van etc. to transfer products to the retail
shop. In case of ata, their are some processors who directly buy wheat from assembly
markets, processed, they have their own packaging system from the manufacturing house, the
packed products carrying mostly in their own vehicles to the selected outlets specially in the
departmental stores and retail shop.
3.1
The Scenario of Marketing Channels
Pattern of marketing channels is an over-all one and by no means universally
applicable in all the regions. Existing data do not make the computations of the proportions
passing through the various channels a realistic possibility. On an average the country rice
grower relations 90 percent of his total output for his own consumption, seed needs, in kind
payments and other ouch uses. Twenty-five percent of his marketed surplus is sold on farms
14
(Farruk, 1970). Unless the region is in a government procurement zone, he has an option to
sell to three market functionaries: the local Bepari, Faria or the Kutial. In the village market
Dalals or broker appear as functionary. Most of the assembly is dispatched to a market in the
higher tier and approximately 10 percent are sold for local consumption by the landless
laborers and non-farm workers.
Rice assembled from the villages and village "hats" by Farias and Beparies and
brought to the intermediate markets are usually sold to the local Beparies and Aratdars.
Assembled paddy is usually sold to the rice millers or local Kutials.
Aratdars make
purchased on behalf of traders from different consuming markets. Rice millers sell processed
rice either to the local Aratdars or direct to the traders from the consuming centers.
Aratdars in the urban markets act as the sales agents and stockholders for the rice
traders. Retailers, also known as Paikars, buy their supplies from the Aratdars and transport
them to their respective retail shops. On the other hand, the government stocks are released
from their godowns and retailed through Food for Work, Food for Education, VGF and OMS
run by different organizations.
3.2
Functional Variety of Marketing Process in Private Sector
The private sector is a decentralized conglomeration of a large number of institutions
each performing a variety of functions in the marketing process. It is complex process with
significant intra and inter-regional variation's a factor, which nullifies any efforts at broad
generalizations. Linkage between sources of wheat supply, mills and end products were
shown in Table-8.
1.
Farias and Beparies:- This group are paying prime role in the output market.
The number of this group is still increasing in the recent years. More then two thirds of
the output now is sold at the farm gate, mostly to these Farias and Beparies as against
one third in the late sixties.
2.
Small milllers:- Small millers and Busker/Crushers now directly go at the farm
gate to procure/buy one fifth of their paddy requirements.
3.
Wholesaler/Arathdars:- The agents of paddy Wholesalers and Arathdars are
also now goes direct to the farmers door and collect paddy which as not common in the
past times.
In this connection it can be easily conclude that the recent years farmers are not only
in the marketing stage but also as the marketing growth center. There are also some changes
15
in the marketing of paddy and wheat that the farmers are getting the access to the stock and
warehousing centers like shah gudam rinm sangshta type chain in between farmers and
traders (even it is very little facility according to need).
Consumers
External
Resources
Retailers
Government
Commercial
importers
Food
Aid
Wholesalers of
milled wheat
Food processor/
Manufacturers
Compact/Major
Mills
importersPFDS
External
Resources
Wholesalers
Private Importers
Intermediaries
Roller mills
Wheat crushers
Beparies
Beneficiaries
of PFDS offtake
Local
Producers
Fig.2: Wheat marketing operation Channels in Bangladesh
16
Consumers
Retailers
O.M.S.
Retailers
Storage
godown
Import
of rice
Wholesellers/
commission
agents
Millers
Private
sector
Brokers/
commission
agents
Assembling
markets
Husking
rice
Traders/Huskers
rice
Millers
rice
Export
superfine
rice
Food
Department
Assembling
market
Faria
Seed/feel
Godown/
rice
Import
Rural hats
Local Producers
Fig.3: Rice marketing operation channels in Bangladesh
17
3.2.1 Market Chain for Rice

Husker/Small Processor Cum Trader
They are the person who own a husking machine and small mills and
maintains business premises with necessary staff for running the business. They
process the paddy or wheat not ably trading themselves but also give service to other
customers to process their products at a determined charges/prices.

Rice Miller
They are big trader having large investment in processing plant, godowns,
business premises and staff. They buys paddy and wheat directly and also through
agents and process the same into rice/ata and sell it to the wholesalers and retailers in
the local areas and distant markets.

Wholesalers/Arathdars
This group is operating their business in big assembling, consuming and
distributing markets. They have their premises and act as agent of both buyers and
sellers and provides temporary storage facilities to them. They charges commission
for their services to the buyers or sellers, which covers the cost of storage also, if
required.

Retailers
They are the last link in the marketing chain. They are a small trader in
between consumers and wholesalers. They own premises in the consuming markets
and sell rice/ ata usually ranging 1 kg to 20 kg maximum. Recently there are another
chain are being append for ata. The retailers (specially the departmental stores) pack
ata in one/two kg in beautiful packaging paper with different brand name and sell
them to the consumer. In the conclusion the food grain market has become thick and
that old geographical decentralization took over the concentration and comparatively
more specialized situation.
There are about eight thousand rural markets around the country (Begum, 1999). Fig.
2 & 3 showed the food grain market pattern model in Bangladesh. Most of these markets
are small and local in nature and cater to the needs of local people within a radius of 2 to 3
18
miles. These markets usually sit twice in a week. The rice growers bring their produce
mostly in the form of paddy in small quantities usually varying 5-15 seers and sell the same
to local consumers, kutials and other middle traders viz. farias, beparis etc. Besides rural
hats there are one or two assembly market within a radius of 5-10 miles from the premises of
growers where large number of buyers and sellers assembling on market day. The local
growers, faria, beparies etc do the assembling of paddy, rice, wheat and all other
commodities in these markets. The buyers are also the local consumers, agents of the
stockiest, wholesalers; millers coming from distant market centers.
Another important chain is arathdars / dalals (middlemen) who arrange buying and
selling of the staff for a fixed charge known as commission. The wholesalers after a variety
of service ranging from providing storage facilities to short term financing. They are
numerous in the big urban, semi-urban important big assembling, distributing and
consuming centers. Almost all food grains rice and wheat ultimately goes to the processed
channel i.e. in the milling centers either in the small local mills or big and or automatic
mills. The raw materials husked, polished and processed in the form of rice and ata and then
go to the absolute consumers.
Grading and standardization is a very important marketing function because it affects
the process of buying, selling and price formation. However, there is no officially initiated
and implemented standardization of the different grades of food grain in the country. In the
process of marketing it is the traders, Aratdars, Dalals and Farias, who grade rice. Apparently
there are some concepts and variables, which are adopted by these functionaries in structuring
a system of grading across the country. The whole process is based on "direct" examination
of the product.
Because of the institutional and environmental set-up within which these private
traders operate it is very difficult to elicit information to quantify the actual volume of
financing done on the different accounts as mentioned above. It is difficult to find out the rate
of interest they realize from the client of their financing because most of them do not agree
that they are moneylenders. They insist that this is a part of the service they provide and a
basis for their completion among themselves. They also do not admit that they charge a
higher price than the market price, which would mean that their incomes are per unit
commission as well as the difference in prices.
Some larger Beparies in the intermediate markets occasionally advance money to
Farias are the only group of functionaries who always play the role of debtors and never a
creditor as far as cash financing is concerned. The large rice mills depend on number of
19
Farias and traders for their supplies of paddy. They usually advance money to those suppliers
who have been dealing with them for quite sometime and are considered trustworthy and
dependable.
The usual profit fluctuations due to the usual uncertainties in business are borne by
the Beparies, Farias, Kutuals and Millers. Aratdars and Dalals are the group which earn a
fixed amount of profit per unit of food grain handled and do not have to bear the risk related
to the trade. The institutional arrangement for the dissemination of market information in the
private trade channels seems quite efficient. The most common media, of course, is "the word
of the mouth." Telegrams and telephones, although frequently used, have not yet attained a
position of importance as dissemination of market information. Now Grameen phone actively
worked for this purpose efficient way. Personal correspondence has considerable importance
in the process. Radio and newspapers are the most unimportant sources of dissemination
among the functionaries because they consider them incorrect and biased. The area in which
market information is most lacking is the information on stock held. Private stockholders
never let their competitors know of their own stocks. Neither do they know the overall stock
position in the country. Even information on the actual stocks held by the government is not
disseminated among the traders regularly.
3.3
Marketing System in Public Sector
A very dynamic and active market system can sometime enhance food security,
particularly during natural calamity as well as during lean period of cereal production
(Khaliquzzaman, 1997). Karim (1997) reported that Bangladesh had annual food deficit of
around 1.5 million metric tons, varying from year to year. The deficit is met by importing
foodgrains through both public and private sectors. Rice is the staple food, which provides
68% of the calorie and 54% of the protein intake of an individual on an average. The total
food consumption is estimated 868 gm/day/person of which 58% consists of cereals, 34%
vegetable plants foods and 8% animal food. It was also found that more than 50% of the total
population suffered from malnutrition for lack of adequate diet who live below poverty line.
The market plays a very vital role in achieving food security, because it is the market,
which determines the availability as well as the price. Even though there is money in the
hands of the people, non-availability of foodgrains would shot the price up beyond the
consumer's reach. On the other hand, even of there are huge stocks in the market, the lack of
purchasing power would make it impossible for the people to buy. Market failure sometimes
20
causes disruption and such failure leads to non-availability as well as higher price. The inter
seasonal and inter market aviations of price of foodgrains also cause disruption in the market
and puts handle in the way of people reaching to food supply. A very dynamic and active
market system can enhance food security particularly during natural calamity as well as lean
period of cereal production (Kohls and Joseph, 1985).
With the gradually increasing commercialization and the application of modern
inputs, the market of food grain in Bangladesh has significantly expanded due to sale by
surplus farmers as a result of increased production per unit land. The basic agricultural
marketing policy has been sacking to promote free play of the market forces in determining
the prices, remove controls and regulation and encourage larger participation of the private
sector and provide reasonable facilities for its proper performance in recent years (Shabuddin,
Q and Dorosh, D.A, 1998).
The dominant marketing channel of paddy/rice’s beside the governments PFDS is the
private sector, which includes beparies, miller, arathdars, wholesalers, retailers and
consumers. In this chain, the marginal producers and the poor are the affected groups. Due to
the faulty market systems, once they have to sell their products at low price and again, they
have to purchase their necessary food at high price in the lean time. In such situation neither
the gradual increase of production of rice, nor the availability of food grain in the market
ensures the food security for large marginal and poor people of the country (Hossain, 1991).
Shabuddin and Dorosh (1998) showed that very often price increase is determined by the
seasonal pattern and not always by the market anomalies. They reported that spatial
difference and market anomalies did not determine the price of rice market. Rice market is
integral in nature. Price difference is not only determined by the seasonal pattern it also
depends on climatic changes.
The seasonal and annual changes in climatic conditions caused by vary agricultural
outputs, price of food commodities display wider inter-year and intra-year dispersion (FAO,
1983). Besides market, the distribution system also plays a vital role for enhancing greater
access to food by the poor. The market and the PFDS have important links. The government
food distribution systems are to be made more effective, timely and pro-poor as well as the
market situations are to be controlled, in a way that would benefit the vast majority of poor
people and the marginal farmers. There should be more meaningful interactions and
integration among the government departments and agencies dealing with PFDS and food
market with the common goal of making the market efficient, responsive and pro-people and
21
that way contribute to pave the way for ensuring greater access to food by the majority poor
of the country.
Table-3: Shares of various channels in PFDS offtakes of wheat.
Annual Averages
Offtake Channels
1989-90 to 1991-92
1992-93 to 1996-97
Statutory rationing (SR)
11.37
1.19
Rural rationing (RR)
1.06
0
Essential priority (EP)
3.64
8.92
Other priority (OP)
11.21
0.37
Large employers (LE)
2.04
0.86
Open market sales (OMS)
0.46
5.53
Flour mills (FM)
16.35
3.88
Palli chakki (PC)
6.38
1.85
Auction and others
0
.90
Total priced distribution
52.50
23.51
Food for work (FFW)
29.83
39.80
Special test relief (STR)
.64
.40
Test relief (TR)
4.14
8.12
Gratuitous relief (GR)
1.17
1.06
Vulnerable group development (VGD)
11.73
14.59
Food for education (FFE)
0
11.7
Others
0
.83
Total non-priced distribution
47.5
76.49
Total wheat distribution
1491.20
944.56
Source: FPMU data, Ministry of Food.
For half a century, government has played a vital role in marketing of food grains in
the country. Table-3 & 4 showed that the shares of various channels in PFDS off takes of
wheat and intake of food grain scenario of Bangladesh. The public food grain distribution
system (PFDS) is to a large extent the outgrowth of government response two famines: the
1943 Bengal famine and the 1974 famine (Ravallion, 1987). Perceived failure of markets to
ensure sufficient food at prices within reach of the poor provided the rationale for
maintaining a national food security stock of food grain.
Lack of purchasing power of the poor, even in years of normal market food grain
supply and prices, spurs the government and donors to operate various direct distribution and
employment programs. In particular, the goals of the Ministry of Food are as follows:
1. Make food grains available to poor households that would not otherwise be able to
acquire enough food;
22
2. Stabilize prices by distributing food grains in urban and rural areas, thus
preventing excessive food grain price increases;
3. Support food grain producers through a system of domestic procurement of
marketable surplus;
4. Supply food grains to priority groups;
5. Arrange for the distribution of food during emergency situations, such as national
calamities.
Table-4: Food Grain Imports and Total PFDS Intake Scenario of Bangladesh.
Financial
Year
Aid
Food Grain Imports (‘000 Tons)
Public
Private
Total
Domestic
Total
Food Aid
Procurement
PFDS
Per
(‘000 mt)
intake
Capita
(‘000 mt)
Per Year
FY57-60 Avg
480
123
-
603
71
674
10.09
FY61-65 Avg
330
447
-
777.8
35
813
6.11
FY66-70 Avg
371
770
-
1142
27
1169
5.91
FY71-75 Avg
845
511
-
1356
43
1399
11.74
FY76-80 Avg
1162
409
-
1571
372
1943
14.06
FY80-85 Avg
1123
641
-
1764
425
2189
11.95
FY86-90 Avg
1332
578
-
1910
457
2367
12.72
FY91-95 Avg
1055
179
560.5
1794.5
495
1731
9.17
1995-96
743.1
840.8
850
2433.9
422
2006
6.14
1996-97
618
112
237
967.1
615
1345
5.03
1997-98
549
249
1135
1932.8
617
1415
4.39
1998-99
1235
777
1480
3491.2
753
2765
9.72
1999-2000
870
0
1234
2103.8
967
1837
6.74
FY95-00 Avg
803
395
987
2185
674
1874
6.42
Source: FPMU data, Ministry of Food.
4.
Foodgrain Price and Its Distribution by the Public Sector
Most of the imports through the Chittagong port are distributed in Dhaka, Chittagong
and other areas east of the river Jamuna while nearly 80 percent of the imports through the
Mongla port are distributed to the area lying in the western region of the country.
Interestingly, the price for government distributed rice is the same in all locations which
shows that the pricing policy does not take into account the variation of transpiration cost
between different areas. The three categories of prices of rice prevailing in the country are the
procurement price, the controlled price and the market price. With the limited data we have it
23
is difficult to estimate the effect of government procurement price and distribution price on
the free market price of rice in the urban and producing areas. Certain aspects of government
price policy, which deserve attention. The procurement price is always lower than the
average free market price. Since most of the procurement zones are also areas in the surplus
rice - producing districts, the impact of this pricing policy on production and reducing
districts, the impact of this pricing policy on production and resource allocation may be quite
significant (Brennan, 1995). On the other hand, procurement from border zones at an
inequitable price may fail as an anti-smuggling measure and may in reality be an incentive
for smuggling and smugglers. Another import thing to notice is that the market prices at
Dhaka are substantially higher than those prevailing in Chittagong. This leads on to ponder
about the effects government controlled price is having on the Dhaka prices, which still
accounts for the largest distribution center of government food grains.
Table-5: Distribution Scenario and Availability of Food Grain of Bangladesh.
Public Distribution (‘000 tons)
Non-
Financial
Year
Avail-
Distri-
as % of
ability
bution as
PFDS
Total
per
% of Avail-
Total
PFDS
Capita
ability
Monetary Distribution
mone
tary
Targeted
Market
EP
Ration
Total
(Kg)
FY57-60 Avg
8
1
71
508
582
590
12.41
158.93
7.81
FY61-65 Avg
7
2
80
650
733
740
13.68
175.29
7.82
FY66-70 Avg
21
29
92
883
1005
1027
16.36
168.41
9.71
FY71-75 Avg
393
106
72
1436
1616
2009
19.56
162.41
17.18
FY76-80 Avg
298
241
95
1232
1568
1867
15.96
158.09
14.29
FY80-85 Avg
563
259
102
1107
1468
2031
27.72
162.64
13.29
FY86-90 Avg
967
322
127
857
1307
2274
42.52
162.32
13.38
FY91-95 Avg
876
368
156
362
887
1764
49.66
164.51
9.32
1995-96
1147
404
180
63
647.2
1794.2
63.93
160.11
9.26
1996-97
1127
45
189
30
263.5
1391
81.02
157.03
7.20
1998-99
1874
9.1
210
26
245.7
2120
88.40
177.00
9.43
1999-2000
1609
55.1
210
26
291.1
1900
84.68
190.57
7.73
FY95-00 Avg
1396
136
198
33
368
1765
79.09
170.38
8.29
Source: FPMU data, Ministry of Food.
Table-1, 4 & 5 gives the total supply-distribution balance sheet of the public sector for
the last decade. The highest quantity of food grain procured internally in one year was 960
thousand m.tons in the year 1989-90 where as, average of this period (1986-90) was 457
thousand m.tons. The highest quantity of food grain imported in one year was about 2917
24
thousand m.tons in the year 1987-88 where as, average of this period (1986-90) was 1910
thousand m.tons (Table-4). It may be noted that it was the year of devastating floods in the
country.
Table-6a: Commodity-wise Export Handled at Chittagong & Mongla Ports.
Commodity
Jute
Jute Goods
C. Boxes
Tea
Hides & Skins
Leather
Fish(dry)frozen
Froglegs
H. Hair
Naptha,molasse
Fertilizer
Shrimp
C/Bones
Rice
Tobacco
General cargo
Garments
Others
Total
All ports
(‘000
M.T.)
185.27
499.63
34.27
10.54
.171
26.46
235.07
275.21
184.32
15.89
.587
.051
.102
2.55
166.53
1636.63
1993-94
Chittagon
g
(‘000
M.T.)
2.69
256.59
34.27
10.54
25.97
235.07
275.21
162.33
166.53
1169.19
Mongla
(‘000
M.T.)
All ports
(‘000 M.T.)
1994-95
Chittagong
(‘000 M.T.)
Mongla
(‘000 M.T.)
182.58
243.04
.171
.490
21.99
15.89
.587
.051
.102
2.55
467.44
250.34
568.94
41.54
12.77
.124
31.78
.203
284.89
333.54
381.24
15.21
.343
.048
.457
201.83
2123.23
3.26
310.97
41.54
12.77
31.48
284.89
333.54
196.74
201.83
1417.00
247.08
257.97
.124
.302
.203
184.50
15.21
.343
.048
.457
706.23
Source: Chittagong and Mongla Port Authority, BBS.
The traders at the terminal markets do not seem to be very much concerned about the
delay in transit time. They may base their sales and purchases on the expectation that supplies
will come after certain intervals. Secondly, government regulations prohibit the storing of
rice for more than seven days but this does not apply to consignments in transit. This
government rule removes the pressure to reduce transport time and thus introduces indirectly
and additional source of imperfection. Especially after February and March, a transit delay
will surely result in a higher sale price at destination.
From the source or the surplus areas of the production, the produce mainly moved by
3 ways namely Waterway, Road (highway) and Railways. Waterway vehicles like boat,
barges, launch and so on mainly used for food grain transport in the past. This system is less
costly and the grain quality is not damaged because of smooth transportation. Railway is still
used for transportation of agricultural commodities. Special wagon is attached with passenger
train in the peak season, But from seventies roadways i.e. truck of different capacities has
25
been used and dominating the transport of food grains in the country. From eighties there has
been significant development of roads, approach roads in the different areas of the country.
Trucks are being used not only in the longest distance but it is also used in the local level
markets. These transport facilities are costly but it is faster and can carry big volume of
foodstuff at a time.
Table-6b: Commodity-wise Export Handled at Chittagong & Mongla Ports.
Commodity
Jute
Jute Goods
C. Boxes
Tea
Hides & Skins
Leather
Fish(dry)frozen
Froglegs
H. Hair
Naptha,molasse
Fertilizer
Shrimp
C/Bones
Rice
Tobacco
General cargo
Garments
Others
Total
1995-96
All ports
(‘000 M.T.)
138.54
389.65
24.00
21.00
15.00
89.00
609.45
8.53
.343
.029
.457
265.00
255.00
1816.00
Chittagong
(‘000 M.T.)
245.00
24.00
21.00
15.00
89.00
506.00
265.00
255.00
1420.00
Mongla
(‘000 M.T.)
138.54
103.45
8.53
.343
.029
.457
396.00
1996-97
All ports
(‘000 M.T.)
181.93
437.54
24.26
21.22
15.16
89.94
647.20
11.20
.450
.038
.600
267.80
257.70
1955.00
Chittagong
(‘000 M.T.)
247.59
24.26
21.22
15.16
89.94
511.35
267.80
257.70
1435.00
Mongla
(‘000 M.T.)
181.93
189.95
135.85
11.20
.450
.038
.600
520.00
Source: Chittagong and Mongla Port Authority, BBS.
Dinajpur is the main source of food grains transferred to deficit area of the country.
But unfortunately there is no direct wagon facility in the train from Dinajpur. The only mode
of transportation is truck. In the season time (specially in aman and irri-boro) the movement
of paddy and rice increased significantly and the truck is also short in supply resultant the
price/ cost of truck is increased. From Dinajpur, Rajshahi, Mymenshigh, and Bogra truck is
the main mode of transpiration. The scenario of commodity-wise export and import handled
at chittagong and Mongla ports during the period 1993-94 to 1996-97 are shown in Table6a&b and Table-7a&b.
Due to the development of roadways in the country, road transport by truck has been
also improved for transport of any type of commodities and products. Specially in Dinajpur
tremendous improvement has been done during last few years and the mainly organized and
26
maintained by Dhaka. But from eighties the local transport agencies have been developed and
now it is still developing. The transportation cost of truck for Dinajpur and Mymensingh
districts are showed in Table-8 & 9. The truck carrying 130.140 bags containing 84 kg of rice
in each bat i.e. 5 tons capacity truck usually carries 10 tons almost double food grains. The
truck cost normally increased in the Aman peak season i.e. from December to March and in
July for Boro/Irri crop. In the season time nearly 200 trucks moved to the deficit areas. In
Mymensingh 10 tons capacity truck has been introduced from 1993, which is higher priced
than 5 tons trucks.
Table-7a: Commodity-wise Import Handled at Chittagong & Mongla ports.
Commodity
Foodgrain
Sugar
Salt
Oil in Drum
Oil
Oil seed
Cement
Cement clinker
Fertilizer
Cotton
Cotton Yarn
Iron & Steel
Tobacco
Paper
Wood pulp
Sundries
Coal
Poles (in bulk)
Machinery
Steel pipes
Pig iron
Steel-iron mat.
General cargo
Edible oil
Others
Total
1993-94
All ports
(‘000 M.T.)
1565.80
2.96
465.81
363.24
107.31
1381.85
159.35
338.52
49.25
1.09
1.33
3.02
1437.51
33.25
1951.21
1.99
19.87
238.13
70.06
8191.54
Chittagong
(‘000
M.T.)
1326.70
2.96
271.77
363.24
107.31
517.30
159.35
247.85
49.25
1.09
1.33
1437.51
33.25
1951.21
19.87
6728.12
Mongla
(‘000
M.T.)
239.10
194.04
864.55
90.67
3.02
1.99
238.13
70.06
1463.42
Source: Chittagong and Mongla Port Authority, BBS.
27
1994-95
All ports
(‘000 M.T.)
Chittagong
(‘000 M.T.)
2201.62
9.80
375.52
466.35
2.38
137.77
1771.63
204.59
666.89
63.85
1.41
.085
1.71
2.99
1845.57
42.69
2505.10
11.57
2.21
25.51
305.73
113.19
10758.12
1703.30
3.80
348.92
466.35
137.77
664.14
204.59
318.20
63.24
1.41
1.71
1845.57
42.69
2505.10
25.51
8638.00
Mongla
(‘000
M.T.)
498.32
6.00
26.60
2.38
1107.49
348.69
.61
.085
2.99
11.57
2.21
305.73
113.19
2120.12
Table-7b: Commodity-wise Import Handled at Chittagong & Mongla ports.
Commodity
Foodgrain
Sugar
Salt
Oil in Drum
Oil
Oil seed
Cement
Cement clinker
Fertilizer
Cotton
Cotton Yarn
Iron & Steel
Tobacco
Paper
Wood pulp
Sundries
Coal
Poles (in bulk)
Machinery
Steel pipes
Pig iron
Steel-iron mat.
General cargo
Edible oil
Others
Total
All ports
(‘000 M.T.)
2100.21
6.91
30.65
2.84
2828.16
580.80
.70
.098
3.45
13.00
2384.00
13.33
2.54
130.42
366.00
2831.00
11294.00
1995-96
Chittagong
(‘000 M.T.)
1526.00
1552.00
179.00
13.00
2384.00
366.00
2831.00
8851.00
Mongla
(‘000 M.T.)
574.21
6.91
30.65
2.84
1276.16
401.80
.70
.098
3.45
13.33
2.54
130.42
2443.00
All ports
(‘000 M.T.)
2073.65
6.15
27.28
2.53
2725.07
540.92
.63
3.07
13.31
2441.10
11.87
2.26
116.09
374.77
2898.81
11237.49
1996-97
Chittagong
(‘000 M.T.)
1562.55
1589.17
183.29
13.31
2441.10
374.77
2898.81
9062.99
Mongla
(‘000 M.T.)
511.10
6.15
27.28
2.53
1135.90
357.63
.63
3.07
11.87
2.26
116.09
2174.50
Source: Chittagong and Mongla Port Authority, BBS.
Table-8: Truck Cost Price from Dinajpur to Dhaka and Chittagong.
Month
1990
January
11,500
February
11,000
March
10,000
April
9500
May
8,500
June
8,000
July
9,000
August
8,000
September 7,000
October
7,500
November 7,000
December 10,500
Average:
8917
Source: DAM, 1999
1991
11,000
10,000
9,000
8,500
7,500
7,000
8,500
7,500
6,000
6,500
6,500
10,000
8167
1992
10,000
9,500
8,500
7,500
7,000
6,500
8,000
7,000
5,500
6,000
6,000
9,500
7583
28
1993
9,500
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,500
6,000
8,000
6,500
5,000
5,000
5,500
9,000
7083
1994
9000
8000
7500
6500
6000
5500
7000
6000
4500
4500
5000
8500
6500
1995
8500
7500
6500
5500
5500
4500
6500
5500
4500
4000
4500
8000
5917
Table-9: Annual Cost for Truck for Mymensingh to Dhaka.
1990
1800-2200
1991
1800-2400
1992
1800-2500
1993
2000-3000
1994
2000-3000
1995
2000-3500
1996
2000-3000
Source: DAM, 1999
Fare for 5 tons truck
Fare for 10 tons truck
From December to February
the cost per truck is increased
around Tk. 200 for Aman and
in April & may for Boro/Irri
season
Dinajpur market (Appendix Table 1a) showed that the seasonal boro price in aman
season of maximum positive changes from previous year was found 52.4% in 1983/84,
45.7% in 1985/86, 47.4% in 1998/99 whereas maximum negative changes from previous year
was found -15% in 1984/85, -13.8% in 1992/93, -21.5% in 1996/97, -15.1% in 2000/01.
Dinajpur market also showed that the maximum positive deviation of seasonal price from
moving average was found 19.7% in 1983/84, 8.8% in 1995/96, 15.7% in 1998/99 whereas
maximum negative deviation was found –17.2% in 1982/83, -17.4% in 1984/85, -14.9% in
1997/98. The price changes scenario indicated that market is not stable. The similar unstable
price scenario was found for the remaining markets (Appendix Table 1a-1f, 2a-2f and 3a-3f).
Public and private imports are the main instruments to achieve a annual stability of prices.
5.
Conclusions and Recommendations
The food grain marketing system has changed dramatically in Bangladesh over the
past several decades. While rice production doubled between the early 1960’s and early
1990’s, the percentage of production that marketed rose from 10-14 percent to nearly 50
percent, and market volume increased six-fold (Table-1&2). The purpose of this study is to
set forth the key issues that must be resolved in formulating a national food policy that can
help achieve food security. The overall targeted output of the research program is to
formulate locally based public policies and strategies for the sustainable development of
agricultural markets. Specific outputs include: (i) increased knowledge and information
about the specific institutions necessary for the development of agricultural markets; (ii)
better understanding of the role of the government and the private sector in accelerating
market development and rural income growth; (iii) increased local institutional and
professional capacity to monitor the development of markets and advise governments and the
29
emerging private sector in this area. In the last two decades many developing countries have
not been successful at developing private, efficient and competitive agricultural markets.
Evidence suggested that this failure is due to institutional and structural deficiencies
that have not been properly addressed by the governments. More research needed to identify
the appropriate role of the government in providing or facilitating the development of those
institutions that are necessary to promote agricultural markets and rural income growth. The
types of institutions needed can be classified into four main categories: (1) market related
institutions such as cooperatives, farmers and traders associations, credit clubs, contract
farming, etc., (2) institutional infrastructure such as roads, communication networks,
commodity exchanges, storage facilities, market information services, etc., (3) regulatory
institutions such as laws regarding market conduct and enforcement of contracts, ownership
rules and property rights, grades and standards, etc., and (4) government and political
institutions that have the capacity to monitor the emergence of markets and support their
development.
The impact of institutional, market and infrastructure development on
smallholder farmers and agricultural income also needs to be assessed.
The respondents and the stakeholders of all categories (farmers, traders, poor, women,
representatives of the local government and community leaders) felt that stabilizing the price
food in the market and continued supply of food grains in the rural markets are the best
options for increasing household food security. The second priority option for mitigation
household food insecurity was to improving PFDS by making it efficient and effective.
Finally suggested to improving rural commutation for better transportation of goods and that
would certainly benefit the locality as well as community.
Due to lack of better
communication and information system on food grain price, market becomes the impediment
by sudden and sometimes artificially related high level of price, Hence, food price
information system should be make effective, timely and quickly to any sudden price-like in
any region and to take quick remedial measures. Through developing better road
communication system, inter and intra-regional markets can spatially be integrated as per
expectation and in that case, transport costs will also be lowered.
The study tried to explore to two interrelated areas meanly market and food
distribution systems in relation to achieving food security for the poor and marginal people.
The study suggested policy responses for improving both the market and the PFDS. This
study will help identify the types of public policies needed for the development of
competitive and efficient agricultural markets that can contribute in reducing rural poverty
and promoting agricultural economic growth in the country.
30
References
Andrews, M.S. and G.C. Rausser, 1986, Some Political Economy Aspects of Macroeconomic
Linkages with Agriculture. American Journal of Agriculture Economy. 68:413-417.
Baumol, W.J., 1982, contestable Markets: An Uprising in the Theory of Industry Structure.
American Economic Review. 72: 1-15.
Begum, S., 1999, Commodity report of Food grain. Department of Agricultural Marketing,
Dhaka.
Brennan, D., 1995, Policies for stabilizing rice prices in Bangladesh. Final report of the
Bangladesh Food grains Management Operations Project. TA No. 2052-BAN.
Chowdhury, N., 1992, Rice market in Bangladesh: A case study in structure, conduct and
performance. IFPRI, Bangladesh Food Policy Project, No. 22.
Crow, B. and K.A.S. Murshid, 1990, The finance of forced and free markets: merchants
capital in Bangladesh grain markets. Paper presented to the meetings of American
Economic Association and Union for Radical Political Economics, Washington DC.
Devine, D.G. and B.W. Marion, 1979, The Influence of Consumer Price Information on
Retail Pricing and Consumer Behavior. American Journal of Agricultural
Economics. 61: 228-237.
FAO, 1983, Implementation and administration of agricultural price in Asia, FAO,
Economic and Social Development Paper.
Farruk, M.O., 1970, The structure and performance of the rice marketing system in East
Pakistan. USAID Prices Research Project. Report No. 31. Cornell University, U.S.A.
Hall, L.L. et-al., 1981, Case studies in the Transmission of Farm Prices. Dept. of Agriculture
Economics, Cornell University A.E. Research. 81-12. U.S.A.
Heien, D.M., 1980, Markup Pricing in a Dynamic Model of the Food Industry. American
Journal of Agricultural Economics. 62: 10-18.
Hess, A.C, 1972, Experimental Evidence on Price Formation in Competitive Markets. Journal
of Political Economy. 80: 375-385.
Hossain, M., 1991, Agriculture in Bangladesh. Performance, Problems and Prospects,
Dhaka University Press Ltd.
IFPRI. Website, http://www.ifpri.org/textonly/themes/2mp01.ht.
31
Islam, A.; H. Mukarram; N. Islam; S. Akhter; E. Harun and J. N. Efferson, 1985, A
benchmark study of rice marketing in Bangladesh: BIDS and Directorate of
Agricultural Marketing.
Khaliquzzaman, Q., 1997. Bangladesh: Agricultural Growth and Environments and
Development 4(1): Bangladesh Unnayan Parisad, Dhaka.
Karim, A. et at., 1997, Towards sustainable food security in Bangladesh. Asia Pacific
Journal on Environmental and Development, 4(1). Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad,
Dhaka.
Kohls, R.L. and N.V. Joseph, 1985, Marketing of Agricultural Products N.Y, Machmillan
Publishing company.
Kinnucan, H.W. and O.D. Forker, 1987, Asymmetry in farm- Retail price Transmission for
Major Dairy Products. American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 69: 285-292.
Lamm, R.M. and P.C. Westcott, 1981, the Effects of Changing Input costs on Food Prices.
American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 63: 187-196
MacDonald, J.M., 1987, Economics of Scope, Contestable Theory and Economic Efficiency.
Ed. Kilmer, W.L. and W. Armbruster, In Economic Efficiency in Agricultural and
Food Marketing. Iowa State University Press, Iowa, U.S.A.
Mandal, M.A.S., 2000, Changing Rural Economy of Bangladesh (Ed.), Bangladesh
Economic Association, Dhaka.
Marion, B.W. et al., 1986, The Organization and Performance of the U.S. Food System
Lexington, mass.: Lexington Book.
Muller, W.F., 1983, Market Power and its Control in the Food System. American Journal of
Agricultural Economics. 65: 855-868.
Nelson, P.E.Jr., 1966, Price Competition among Retail Food Stores. Journal of Farm
Economics. 48: 172-187.
Ninno, C. del and P. Dorosh, 1998, Government policy, markets and food security in
Bangladesh. . IFPRI, FMRS Project.
Padberg, D.I., 1968, Economics of Food Relating. Ithaca, N.Y., Cornell University. Food
Distribution Program.
Ravallion, M., 1987, Markets and Famines. Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Shahabuddin. Q. and P.A. Dorosh, 1998, Rice Market in the 1997-98 Asian Season: A
Rapid Appraisal Analysis. IFPRI, Dhaka.
Shahabuddin, Q. and Rahman, R.I., 1999, Growth and Stagnation of Bangladesh Agriculture.
Dhaka: Centre for Integrated Rural Development in Asia and Pacific.
32
Tomek, W.G. and K.L. Robinson, 1995, Agricultural Product Prices. Cornell University
Press, 1 thaca and London.
Tomek, W.G., 1985, Limits on Price Analysis. American Journal of Agriculture Economics.
67: 905-915.
Tomek, W.G. and K.L. Robinson, 1977, Agricultural Price Analysis and Outlook in a Survey
of Agricultural Economics Literature. Vol-1. Ed. L.R. Martin. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
Ward, R.W., 1982, Asymmetry in retail, wholesale, and shipping pointy pricing for Fresh
Vegetables. American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 64:205-212.
Westcott, P.C., 1986, Aggregate Indicators in the quarterly Agricultural forecasting Model.
USDA, ERS. Staff Report AGES 860916.
33
Appendix
Appendix Table1a: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Aman
Season of Dinajpur, Rangpur, Bogra and Rajshahi Market during the Period of
1980-81 to 2001-02.
Market
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
459
1981-82
471
2.6
4.0
478
2.8
2.1
440
-2.2
443 -0.8
441 -28.2
508 -13.1
1982-83
429
-8.9
518 -17.2
461
-3.6
527 -12.5
440
0.0
521 -15.5
468
6.1
521 -10.2
1983-84
654
52.4
546 19.7
641 39.0
550 16.5
683
55.2
632
8.1
655
40.0
593
10.4
1984-85
556 -15.0
673 -17.4
549 -14.4
664 -17.3
772
13.0
743
1985-86
810
45.7
762
6.3
802 46.1
755
6.2
775
0.4
1986-87
919
13.5
880
4.4
915 14.1
876
4.5
941
1987-88
912
-0.8
913
-0.1
910
-0.5
910
0.0
1988-89
908
-0.4
922
-1.5
904
-0.7
916
-1.3
1989-90
946
4.2
951
-0.5
935
3.4
948
-1.3
1990-91
999
5.6
992
0.7
1004
7.4
980
1991-92
1030
3.1
972
5.9
1000
-0.4
951
5.2 1024
1992-93
888 -13.8
937
-5.3
848 -15.2
902
-6.0
916 -10.5
1993-94
894
975
-8.3
858
1.2
941
-8.9
917
0.1
1994-95
1144
28.0 1071
6.8
1118 30.3
1039
7.6 1158
26.3
1995-96
1175
2.7 1080
8.8
1141
1041
9.6 1241
7.2
0.7
922 -21.5
453
995
-7.3
450
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Rajshahi
1980-81
1996-97
465
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Bogra
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Rangpur
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Year
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Dinajpur
2.1
863 -24.4
921
6.7
468
614
3.9
657
0.3
719
-8.6
829 -6.6
844
28.5
822
2.7
21.4
879
7.1
964
14.2
915
5.4
920
-2.2
912
0.9
936
-2.9
928
0.9
874
-5.0
905 -3.4
883
-5.7
918
-3.8
921
5.4
939 -1.9
935
5.9
941
-0.6
2.5 1022
11.0
989
3.3 1005
7.5
987
1.8
0.2
987
3.7 1022
1.7
980
4.3
952 -3.8
912 -10.8
945
-3.5
997 -8.0
902
-1.1
988
-8.7
1105
4.8 1149
27.4
1068
7.6
1139
9.0 1154
975 -11.5 1017 -18.0
1080
6.9
936 -18.9
1027
-8.9
1997-98
887
-3.8 1039 -14.6
951
-6.5
1122 -15.2
991
5.9
1096
-9.6
1998-99
1307
47.4 1128 15.9
1299 41.0
1113 16.7 1398
47.0
1192 17.3 1362
37.4
1176
15.8
1999-00
1189
-9.0 1168
1.8
1119 -13.9
1164
1246 -1.6 1175 -13.7
1204
-2.4
2000-01
1009 -15.1 1072
-5.9
1075
1070
1140 -2.2 1076
1115
-3.5
2001-02
1018
-3.9
1028 -10.4
0.4
1070 -4.9
-3.9 1226 -12.3
0.5 1115
1015
1079
34
-9.1
1094
-8.4
Appendix Table1b: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Aman
Season of Pabna, Kushtia, Jessore and Khulna Market during the Period of 1980-81
to 2001-02.
Market
458
478
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Khulna
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Jessore
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Kushtia
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Year
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Pabna
1980-81
541
1981-82
456 -15.7 501.3
-9.0
468
2.2
481
-2.7
512
1982-83
507
11.2 554.7
-8.6
517 10.5
548
-5.7
540
5.5 551.7 -2.1
1983-84
701
38.3 624.7 12.2
659 27.5
622
5.9
603
11.7 613.7 -1.7
697
1984-85
666
-5.0 743.3 -10.4
690
4.7 743.7
-7.2
698
15.8
713 -2.1
739
1985-86
863
29.6 834.7
3.4
882 27.8 843.7
4.5
838
20.1
828
1.2
962
30.2
895
7.5
1986-87
975
13.0
932
4.6
959
2.9
948
13.1 907.3
4.5
984
2.3
972
1.2
1987-88
958
-1.7
951
0.7
956
-0.3
942
1.5
936
-1.3 933.7
0.2
970
-1.4 962.3
0.8
1988-89
920
-4.0
945
-2.6
911
-4.7
932
-2.3
917
-2.0 942.3 -2.7
933
-3.8 950.7
-1.9
1989-90
957
4.0 976.3
-2.0
929
2.0 949.7
-2.2
974
6.2 989.7 -1.6
949
1.7 968.3
-2.0
1990-91
1052
9.9 1025
2.7
1009
8.6 981.3
2.8 1078
10.7
1043
3.4 1023
7.8
1000
2.3
1991-92
1065
1.2 1013
5.1
1006
-0.3 963.7
4.4 1076
-0.2
1023
5.2 1029
0.6 991.7
3.8
8.7 932.3
1992-93
923 -13.3
962
-4.1
876 -12.9
1993-94
898
-2.7 986.7
-9.0
920
1994-95
1139
26.8 1074
6.1
1145 24.5
1091
1995-96
1184
4.0 1086
9.0
1207
1996-97
935 -21.0 1040 -10.1
7.0 1091
-8.4
510
0.4
552
-7.2 541.3
2.0
477 -13.6 575.3 -17.1
46.1 637.7
9.3
6.0 799.3
-7.5
934
-6.2
914 -15.1 975.3 -6.3
923 -10.3 970.7
-4.9
5.0 980.3
-6.2
936
2.4
960
4.0
1021
-5.9
5.0 1174
25.4
1105
6.2 1179
22.8
1122
5.1
1096 10.1 1206
2.7
1101
9.5 1226
4.0
1112
10.2
5.4
936 -22.5
1050 -10.9
923 -23.5
1037 -11.0
932 -24.0
1044 -10.7
1101
981
6.3
1083 -9.4
974
4.5
1082 -10.0
37.2
1166 15.5 1340
1000
1998-99
1339
1359 34.8
1179 15.3 1346
37.6
1155
16.0
1999-00
1104 -17.6 1156
-4.5
1169 -14.0
1191
-1.8 1170 -13.1
1193 -1.9 1151 -14.1
1187
-3.0
2000-01
1024
-5.2
1044 -10.7
1090
-4.2 1063
1104 -3.7 1070
1101
-2.8
2001-02
1112
-7.2 1080
7.7
1008 -7.1
1997-98
33.9 1148 16.7
1008
595
7.1
-8.4
1057
1079
35
-9.1
1082
-7.0
Appendix Table1c: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Aman
Season of Barisal, Patuakhali, Mymensingh and Kishoreganj during the Period of
1980-81 to 2001-02.
591
1981-82
556
1982-83
1983-84
1984-85
751
1985-86
961
1986-87
512
-5.9 542.3
498
-2.7 506.3
480 -13.7
578 -17.0
509
698
643
8.6
712 39.9 659.7
7.6 803.3
2.2
-1.6
573 -11.2
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Kishoreganj
642
2.5
45.4
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Year
1980-81
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Market
Patuakhali
Mymensingh
Barisal
640
470 -26.8
533 -11.8
478 -25.3 538.3 -11.2
487
7.9
702
553 -11.9
497
44.1 618.3 13.5
3.6
712
4.0 562.3 -11.6
43.3
627
13.6
-6.5
758
6.5 762.3
-0.6
666
-5.1
740 -10.0
672
-5.6 748.3 -10.2
922
4.2
817
7.8 855.7
-4.5
852
27.9
822
3.6
861
28.1 831.3
3.6
1054
9.7 1017
3.6
992 21.4
931
6.6
948
11.3 916.3
3.5
961
11.6 928.3
3.5
1987-88
1037
-1.6 1023
1.4
984
-0.8 984.7
-0.1
949
0.1 946.3
1988-89
978
-5.7 985.7
-0.8
978
-0.6
1015
-3.6
942
1989-90
942
-3.7 963.7
-2.2
1083 10.7
1061
2.1
944
1990-91
971
1991-92
1057
28.0
963
0.2 956.7
0.7
946
-1.8 946.7
-0.1
0.2 971.3 -2.8
931
-1.6
973
-4.3
990
-1.9
1122
3.6
1100
2.0 1028
8.9
1005
2.3 1042
11.9
1005
3.7
8.9 990.3
6.7
1096
-2.3
1066
2.8 1043
1.5
994
4.9 1042
0.0
1003
3.9
1992-93
943 -10.8 949.3
-0.7
979 -10.7
1008
-2.8
911 -12.7 954.7 -4.6
925 -11.2 964.7
-4.1
1993-94
848 -10.1 977.3 -13.2
948
-3.2
1020
-7.1
910
927
0.2
1002
-7.5
1133 19.5
1038
9.2 1151
26.5
4.5 1154
24.5
1104
4.5
1033
1037
-0.4 1244
8.1
1106 12.5 1232
6.8
1099
12.1
1994-95
1141
1995-96
1228
3.1
0.3
945 -0.3
-0.7
34.6 1072
6.4
7.6 1111 10.5
1996-97
965 -21.4 1062
-9.2
945
1997-98
994
-9.5
1000
1998-99
1335
1999-00
1164 -12.8 1175
-1.0
2000-01
1027 -11.8 1112
-7.7
2001-02
1146
3.0 1098
34.3 1164 14.7
-8.8
-8.5 992.7
1102
922 -25.9
1030 -10.5
912 -26.0
1038 -12.2
925
0.3
1072 -13.7
971
6.5
1102 -11.9
1408 40.8
1158 21.6 1370
48.1
1144 19.8 1424
46.7
1185
20.2
1065 -24.4
1179
-9.6 1136 -17.1
1200 -5.3 1160 -18.5
1216
-4.6
1063
1068
-0.4 1093
1100 -0.7 1065
1100
-3.2
5.8
-0.2
-4.8
-0.1 990.7 -8.1
1118 -10.5
1075
1072
36
-3.8
1074
-8.2
Appendix Table1d: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Aman
Season of Jamalpur, Tangail, Faridpur and Dhaka Market during the Period of
1980-81 to 2001-02.
Market
452
636
633
1.1 458.7
-1.9
456
0.9 461.3
-1.2
512 -19.5 552.3 -7.3
489 -22.7
481
6.9 526.3
-8.6
476
4.4 515.7
-7.7
509
-0.6 545.3 -6.7
498
648
34.7 590.7
9.7
6.8
615
20.8 585.3
5.1
688
3.6 710.3 -10.3
632
2.8
0.8
634
0.3 734.7 -13.7
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Dhaka
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Faridpur
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Tangail
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Year
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Jamalpur
1980-81
445
1981-82
450
1982-83
1983-84
1984-85
643
-0.8
709
-9.3
1985-86
836
30.0 809.3
3.3
879 38.0 831.3
5.7
1986-87
949
13.5 910.3
4.2
978 11.3 941.7
3.9
938
47.9
834 12.5
915
4.5
904
1.2
1987-88
946
-0.3 939.7
0.7
968
-1.0
960
0.8
930
-0.9
926
0.4
921
0.7 922.7
-0.2
1988-89
924
-2.3 931.3
-0.8
934
-3.5
949
-1.6
910
-2.2 922.7 -1.4
932
1.2 936.3
-0.5
1989-90
924
0.0 952.3
-3.0
945
1.2 978.7
-3.4
928
2.0 948.3 -2.1
956
2.6 979.3
-2.4
1990-91
1009
1991-92
1001
9.2
615 29.2
637
576
627
540
-9.4
1.8 558.3 -10.8
38.2 630.7
9.1
706
2.6 756.7
-6.7
876
24.1 832.3
5.2
978
3.2
1057 11.9
1030
2.7 1007
8.5 983.3
2.4 1050
9.8
1027
2.2
-0.8 964.7
3.8
1087
2.8
1037
4.9 1015
0.8 979.3
3.6 1076
2.5
1032
4.2
971
-9.8 991.7
-2.1
928
-4.4
1024
-9.4
1992-93
884 -11.7
930
-4.9
966 -11.1
1005
-3.8
916
1993-94
905
988
-8.4
961
-0.5
1044
-8.0
936
2.2
1994-95
1175
29.8 1097
7.1
1205 25.4
1136
6.0 1184
26.5
1117
6.0 1174
26.5
1124
4.5
1995-96
1211
1243
1130 10.0 1230
3.9
1132
8.6 1269
8.1
1148
10.5
2.4
3.1 1099 10.2
3.2
1996-97
910 -24.9 1017 -10.5
942 -24.2
1059 -11.1
1997-98
929
2.1 1097 -15.3
993
5.4
1121 -11.4 1036
1998-99
1451
56.2 1169 24.1
1429 43.9
1999-00
1128 -22.3 1216
-7.2
1202 -15.9
2000-01
1069
-1.3
1052 -12.5
2001-02
1052
-5.2 1083
-9.8 955.7 -4.2
1083 -9.2 1002 -21.0
1131 -11.4
5.4
1151 -10.0 1121
11.9
1168
-4.0
1208 18.3 1433
38.3
1282 11.7 1381
23.2
1221
13.1
1228
-2.1 1378
-3.8
1304
5.7 1160 -16.0
1205
-3.7
1120
-6.1 1100 -20.2
1106
-3.0
1106
983 -20.1
1012 -7.5
1119
37
1199 -8.3 1073
1084
-7.5
Appendix Table1e: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Aman
Season of Sylhet, Comilla, Noakhali and Chittagang Market during the Period of
1980-81 to 2001-02.
Market
1980-81
625
603
602
1981-82
424 -32.2 505.7 -16.2
440 -27.0 514.7 -14.5
556
1982-83
468
10.4 526.3 -11.1
501 13.9
-9.4
601
1983-84
687
46.8 596.7 15.1
718 43.3 631.3 13.7
703
1984-85
635
-7.6
702
-9.5
675
705
1985-86
784
23.5 781.7
0.3
865 28.1 838.7
3.1
878
24.5 860.3
2.1
1986-87
926
18.1 877.7
5.5
976 12.8
938
4.1
998
13.7
953
1987-88
923
-0.3 914.7
0.9
973
-0.3
965
0.8
983
-1.5
973
1988-89
895
-3.0 903.7
-1.0
946
-2.8 954.3
-0.9
938
-4.6
1989-90
893
-0.2
934
-4.4
944
-0.2 987.3
-4.4
965
2.9
1990-91
1014
13.5 977.3
3.8
1072 13.6
1037
3.4 1097
1991-92
1025
1.1 986.7
3.9
1094
2.1
1053
3.9 1116
553
-6.0 752.7 -10.3
8.1
620 -3.1
445 -18.8
483
-7.9
456
2.5
506
-9.9
5.0
617
35.3
569
8.4
762 -7.5
634
2.8 660.7
-4.0
731
15.3 777.3
-6.0
4.7
967
32.3 889.7
8.7
1.0
971
0.4 972.7
-0.2
962 -2.5
980
0.9
987
-0.7
1000 -3.5 1010
3.1
1031
-2.0
13.7
1059
3.6 1103
9.2
1077
2.4
1.7
1071
4.2 1117
1.3
1075
3.9
-2.1
17.0 669.7
0.3
921 -10.1
957
-3.8
994
-9.1
1019
-2.4 1000 -10.4
1993-94
925
0.4 1009
-8.3
968
-2.6
1052
-8.0
1031 -3.0 1005 -10.0
1027
977
-2.3
1054 -7.3
1994-95
1180
27.6 1139
3.6
1193 23.2
1153
3.4 1185
21.3
1139
1995-96
1312
11.2 1139 15.2
1299
7.9 1256
6.0
8.9
1204
1996-97
924 -29.6 1066 -13.3
1119 -13.9
1148
1997-98
963
4.2 1079 -10.7
1025
1201 -14.6
1998-99
1349
40.1 1134 18.9
1999-00
1091 -19.1 1176
-7.2
2000-01
1088
-0.8
2001-02
1111
958
-4.7
1064 -10.0
4.0 1229
28.3
1155
6.4
1115 12.6 1278
4.0
1138
12.3
905 -27.9
1040 -13.0
960
6.1
1086 -11.6 1032
13.7
1078
-4.3
1458 42.2
1229 18.7 1392
45.0
1157 20.3 1295
25.5
1155
12.2
1203 -17.5
1255
-4.1 1120 -19.5
1235 -9.3 1137 -12.2
1156
-1.6
1103
1142
-3.4 1193
1144
1080
-4.2
-8.4
-8.3
-2.5
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
548
-7.6 586.3 -5.2
1992-93
-0.3 1097
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Chittagang
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Noakhali
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Comilla
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Year
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Sylhet
1121
1119
38
6.5
908 -29.0
4.3 1035
1069
-9.0
1073 -15.4
Appendix Table1f: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Aman
Season of Rangamati, Khagrachari and Bandarban Market during the Period of
1980-81 to 2001-02.
Market
610
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Bandarban
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Khagrachari
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Year
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Rangamati
1980-81
598
605
1981-82
451 -24.6
502 -10.2
455 -25.4 508.7 -10.6
458 -24.3 507.7 -9.8
1982-83
457
1.3
532 -14.1
461
1.3 534.7 -13.8
460
1983-84
688
50.5
593 16.0
688 49.2 594.7 15.7
688
49.6
1984-85
634
-7.8
671
-5.5
635
-7.7 671.3
-5.4
631
-8.3 667.3 -5.4
1985-86
691
9.0 746.3
-7.4
691
8.8 734.7
-5.9
683
8.2 776.7 -12.1
1986-87
914
32.3
837
9.2
7.6 1016
48.8 903.7 12.4
1987-88
906
-0.9 913.3
-0.8
878
0.0
1988-89
920
1.5 936.3
-1.7
962
9.6 933.7
6.8
878 27.1 815.7
961
906
-3.1 1012
0.4 535.3 -14.1
593 16.0
-0.4 997.7
1.4
3.0
965
-4.6 981.3 -1.7
-4.8
967
0.2 990.7 -2.4
1989-90
983
999
-1.6
-0.1
1009
1990-91
1094
11.3 1063
2.9
1105 15.0
1054
4.9 1040
7.5
1028
1.1
1991-92
1113
1.7 1066
4.4
1095
-0.9
1058
3.5 1078
3.7
1053
2.4
1992-93
991 -11.0 1020
-2.8
973 -11.1
1057
-7.9 1041
-3.4
1005
3.6
1993-94
956
-3.5 1035
-7.6
1103 13.4
1088
1994-95
1158
21.1 1113
4.0
1188
7.7
1196
-0.7 1279
42.7
1995-96
1225
5.8 1142
7.3
1297
9.2
1143 13.5 1292
1.0
1996-97
1042 -14.9 1101
-5.4
1997-98
1037
-0.5 1173 -11.6
975
-3.5
1088 -10.4
1998-99
1440
38.9 1281 12.4
1054 14.6
1031
2.2 1279
31.2
1135 12.7
1999-00
1365
-5.2 1349
1.2
1120
6.3
1138
-1.6 1152
-9.9
1127
2000-01
1243
-8.9 1266
-1.8
1240 10.7
1187
2001-02
1190
944 -27.2
920
896 -13.9
1054 -10.4 1010 -21.8
-2.5 972.7
1202
1.4
-5.4
4.4
950 -17.5
967
39
1072 -16.4
1156 10.7
1194
8.2
1092 -7.5
2.2
1023 -7.1
Appendix Table2a: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Aus
Season of Dinajpur, Rangpur, Bogra and Rajshahi Market during the Period of
1980-81 to 2001-02.
Market
1980-81
478
1981-82
482
0.8
503
-4.2
1982-83
549
13.9
1983-84
601
1984-85
652
1985-86
783
20.1
771
1.6
1986-87
878
12.1
855
2.7
868 21.1 827.7
1987-88
904
3.0
912
-0.9
898
3.5
1988-89
954
5.5 933.3
2.2
955
1989-90
942
-1.3 970.3
-2.9
941
-1.5 968.7
1990-91
1015
985
3.0
1010
1991-92
998
-1.7 954.7
4.5
992
1992-93
489
468
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
593
27.8 558.7
6.1
619
4.4 642.7
-3.7
549 17.3 538.7
1.9
608
0.1
599
9.1 598.7
0.1
624
8.5 678.7
-3.9
648
8.2 654.7
-1.0
716
717 10.6 744.3
-3.7
776
4.9
880
13.4
907
-1.0
888
0.9
6.3 931.3
2.5
905
-2.9
932
3.0 954.3 -2.3
953 -10.7
Moving average price (3year)
549 10.7
2.6 649.3 -3.9
0.9
7.3
Changes from previous
year %)
46.5
544
7.7
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
-2.5
14.7 705.3
1.5
716
8.4 790.7 -1.9
747
848
3.8
878
891 -0.3
1.9 908.3 -0.4
2.3 903.7
-0.6
4.1
925
1.1
942
0.7
969
-2.8
9.3
996
3.4
-1.4 975.3
4.2
10.1
991
3.5 1030
-1.1 971.7
4.5 1016
13.7 1087
5.6
1091 13.1
1028
1995-96
1103
-3.9 1068
3.3
1028
-5.8
1015
952 -13.7 1061 -10.2
926
-9.9
1018
874 -13.9 972.3 -10.1
3.2
-4.3
935
4.7 1015
-9.9
694
4.3 780.3
898
3.0 1026
965 14.9 965.3
-9.2
4.4
981
840 -15.3 932.3
15.7
511
841
-1.8 947.3
1148
2001-02
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
464
1994-95
2000-01
Moving average price (3year)
-6.7 489.3 -15.2
0.7
1999-00
Changes from previous
year %)
415
18.7 1003
1998-99
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
-6.8
9.5 600.7
851 -14.7
1127
476
502
1010
1997-98
Rajshahi
445
-4.3
1993-94
1996-97
Bogra
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Rangpur
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Year
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Dinajpur
17.5
972
-9.5
0.0 1028
17.6
1032 -0.4 1020
880 -13.4
15.9
1023
-0.3
6.1 1193
16.1
1131
5.5 1168
14.5
1109
5.3
1.3 1173
-1.7
1136
3.2 1140
-2.4
1111
2.6
1126 -7.3 1026 -10.0
1108
-7.4
11.3
1139
1.9 1158
12.9
1135
2.0
-9.0 1043 -11.1
18.4 1106
1.9
1099 18.7
1073
2.4 1161
1239
9.9 1189
4.2
1195
8.7
1155
3.5 1213
4.5
1178
3.0 1222
5.5
1177
3.8
1201
-3.1 1151
4.3
1171
-2.0
1102
6.2 1160
-4.4
1142
1.6 1151
-5.8
1140
1.0
1014 -15.6 1046
-3.1
941 -19.6
1013
-7.1 1052
-9.3
1067 -1.4 1047
-9.0
1074
-2.5
924
927
988
40
1025
Appendix Table2b: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Aus
Season of Pabna, Kushtia, Jessore and Khulna Market during the Period of 1980-81
to 2001-02.
Market
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Khulna
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Jessore
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Kushtia
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Year
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Pabna
1980-81
516
617
516
1981-82
495
-4.1
528
-6.3
503 -18.5 582.3 -13.6
501
-2.9 537.3 -6.8
480
-3.0
1982-83
573
15.8 574.7
-0.3
627 24.7 596.3
18.8
3.8
606
26.3 587.3
3.2
1983-84
656
14.5 658.3
-0.4
659
4.7 663.3 -6.1
676
11.6 691.7
-2.3
1984-85
746
13.7
725
2.9
1985-86
773
3.6
808
-4.3
1986-87
905
17.1 866.7
4.4
1987-88
922
1.9
930
-0.9
879
2.0
1988-89
963
4.4 957.3
0.6
920
1989-90
987
2.5 1000
-1.3
947
2.9 964.3
1990-91
1051
6.5 1020
3.1
1026
8.3 989.3
1991-92
1021
-2.9 987.7
3.4
995
-3.0 961.3
1992-93
891 -12.7 967.3
-7.9
863 -13.3
1993-94
990
998
-0.8
1019 18.1
1015
0.4 1046
17.5
1025
2.0 1062
17.5
1043
1.9
1994-95
1113
12.4 1058
5.2
1162 14.0
1091
6.5 1140
9.0
1098
3.9 1162
9.4
1114
4.3
1995-96
1072
-3.7 1045
2.6
1092
1071
1.9 1107
-2.9
1076
2.9 1118
-3.8
1079
3.6
951 -11.3 1054
-9.8
960 -12.1
19.9 1095
4.1
1155 20.3
1111
4.0 1153
1996-97
11.1
5.1 683.7
765 16.1 732.7
5.1
595
-3.6
623
495
573
527
-8.9
4.4
772
23.9 710.3
8.7
793
17.3 738.3
1.2 800.3
-3.3
736
-4.7 793.3 -7.2
746
-5.9
805
-7.3
862 11.4 838.3
2.8
872
18.5
4.2
876
17.4
840
4.3
887
-0.9
903
3.6 915.7 -1.4
898
2.5 905.7
-0.8
4.7 915.3
0.5
972
7.6
1.8
943
5.0 929.3
1.5
-1.8
990
1.9
1011 -2.1
947
0.4 968.7
-2.2
3.7 1071
8.2
1035
3.5 1016
3.5 1044
-2.5
1002
4.2
991
890 -14.8 993.3 -10.4
904
774
-6.0
959 -10.0
1069 -10.2
1997-98
1140
1998-99
1195
4.8 1151
3.9
1217
5.4
1174
1999-00
1117
-6.5 1111
0.5
1149
-5.6
1124
2000-01
1021
-8.6 1071
-4.6
1006 -12.4
1040
2001-02
1074
980 -11.5
837
955
1080 -9.3
7.4
7.3 984.7
3.2
-2.5 970.3
2.1
-8.8 985.7
-8.3
957 -14.4
1075 -11.0
17.7
1120
2.9 1151
20.3
1126
2.2
3.7 1227
6.4
1169
5.0 1270
10.3
1195
6.3
2.2 1126
-8.2
1140 -1.2 1163
-8.4
1158
0.4
-3.3 1066
-5.3
1069 -0.3 1041 -10.5
1063
-2.0
965
1016
41
984
Appendix Table2c: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Aus
Season of Barisal, Patuakhali, Mymensingh and Kishoreganj during the Period of
1980-81 to 2001-02.
498
1981-82
498
1982-83
563
475
0.0 519.7
-4.2
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Kishoreganj
515
495
449 -12.8 512.7 -12.4
448
-9.5
507 -11.6
7.2
574
27.8 552.3
3.9
578
29.0
541
6.8
648
-4.9
634
10.5 645.3 -1.8
597
3.3
592
0.8
734 19.2 716.7
2.4
728
14.8
3.3
601
0.7 643.7
-6.6
797 -5.5
453
-4.6 507.3 -10.7
594 31.1 554.3
1984-85
13.1 353.7 59.2
0 -100.0 433.3 100.0
#DIV/
737 0! 482.3 52.8
1985-86
710
-3.7 794.3 -10.6
800
817
-2.1
753
1986-87
936
31.8 864.3
8.3
917 14.6 885.7
3.5
910
1987-88
947
1.2 948.3
-0.1
940
2.5
946
-0.6
1988-89
962
1.6
974
-1.2
981
4.4
959
2.3
1989-90
1013
5.3 1010
0.3
956
-2.5
1019
-6.2
1990-91
1055
4.1 1022
3.2
1120 17.2
1064
5.3 1028
1991-92
998
-5.4 993.3
0.5
1115
1053
5.9 1015
1992-93
927
-7.1
1993-94
1994-95
1983-84
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Year
1980-81
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Market
Patuakhali
Mymensingh
Barisal
616
3.7
9.0
-0.4
924 -17.1 967.3
733
22.0 736.3
-0.5
6.0
875
19.4 830.7
5.3
912
0.2 915.3 -0.4
884
1.0 890.3
-0.7
924
1.3 932.3 -0.9
912
3.2 917.3
-0.6
961
4.0
956
4.8 967.7
-1.2
20.8 858.3
7.0
971 -1.0
1001
2.7 1035
8.3
1005
-1.3 974.3
4.2 1024
-1.1
993
3.1
920 -10.2 985.3
-6.6
880 -13.3 965.3 -8.8
3.0
987
-6.1
1036
11.8 1034
0.2
13.8
1012 -1.1 1012
10.0
1029
-1.7
1139
9.9 1098
3.7
1200 39.0
1088 10.3 1154
15.3
1089
6.0 1156
14.2
1090
6.0
1995-96
1120
-1.7 1095
2.3
1200
0.0
1204
-3.6
1082
1996-97
1027
-8.3 1076
-4.6
1212
1.0
1212
0.0
1997-98
1081
5.3 1103
-2.0
1224
1.0
1220
0.3 1119
1998-99
1202
11.2 1136
5.8
1225
0.1
1203
1999-00
1125
-6.4 1126
-0.1
1160
-5.3
1186
2000-01
1050
-6.7 1092
-3.8
1172
1.0
1171
2001-02
1100
863
-4.5
3.4
705
-6.6 995.7 -13.3 1001
-0.3 1112
2.8 1103
-4.6
1086
1.5
1070 -8.5 1000
-9.3
1076
-7.0
14.3
1093
2.3 1124
12.4
1119
0.4
1.8 1182
5.6
1156
2.3 1233
9.7
1192
3.5
-2.2 1166
-1.4
1131
3.1 1218
-1.2
1163
4.7
1055 -0.8 1039 -14.7
1073
-3.2
979 -12.0
0.1 1046 -10.3
1180
952
42
963
Appendix Table2d: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Aus
Season of Jamalpur, Tangail, Faridpur and Dhaka Market during the Period of
1980-81 to 2001-02.
Market
1980-81
497
1981-82
444 -10.7
503 -11.7
476
1982-83
568
531
7.0
620 30.3
1983-84
581
2.3 615.7
-5.6
638
1984-85
698
20.1 670.7
4.1
1985-86
733
5.0 771.3
-5.0
1986-87
883
20.5 836.3
5.6
1987-88
893
1.1 896.7
-0.4
1988-89
914
2.4
912
0.2
1989-90
929
1.6 947.3
1990-91
999
7.5
1991-92
985
-1.4
1992-93
836 -15.1 928.7 -10.0
1993-94
965
1994-95
1995-96
1996-97
474
27.9
546
0.4 523.3
2.9
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Dhaka
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Faridpur
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Tangail
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Year
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Jamalpur
544
-9.0
507
-7.1 556.7 -8.9
477 -12.3
578
7.3
617
21.7 586.3
5.2
605
26.8 572.7
5.6
677
-5.8
635
668 -4.9
636
5.1 671.3
-5.3
773 21.2 734.7
2.9
5.2
752
18.4 689.7
9.0
773
732
5.6
2.6
817
-2.9
682
-9.3 765.7 -10.9
787
1.8 798.3
-1.4
885 11.6
860
2.9
863
26.5
6.9
835
6.1 829.3
0.7
902
1.9 910.3
-0.9
876
1.5 882.3 -0.7
866
3.7
944
4.7
939
0.5
908
3.7
0.0
939
8.4 922.7
1.8
-1.9
971
2.9 989.7
-1.9
940
3.5 956.3 -1.7
963
2.6 983.7
-2.1
971
2.9
1054
8.5
1026
2.7 1021
8.6 987.3
3.4 1049
8.9
1019
2.9
940
4.8
1053
-0.1
1005
4.7 1001
-2.0 971.3
3.1 1046
-0.3
1007
3.8
927 -11.4
793
908
892 -10.9 981.3 -9.1
880
-1.6
909 -13.7
998
1010
-8.2
988
-2.3
1032 13.5
1044
-1.1 1051
17.8
1047
0.4 1058
14.1
1062
-0.4
1163
20.5 1094
6.3
1191 15.4
1122
6.1 1198
14.0
1136
5.4 1202
13.6
1148
4.7
1154
-0.8 1103
4.7
1144
-3.9
1117
2.4 1160
-3.2
1145
1.3 1185
-1.4
1133
4.6
991 -14.1 1090
-9.1
1016 -11.2
1125
-9.7 1078
-7.1
1146 -5.9 1012 -14.6
1134 -10.7
19.0
1154
15.4
-8.9
807
21.5
542 -12.0
1997-98
1124
13.4 1119
0.4
1215 19.6
1160
4.8 1199
11.2
1202 -0.2 1204
1998-99
1243
10.6 1185
4.9
1248
2.7
1214
2.8 1328
10.8
1245
6.7 1247
3.6
1206
3.4
1999-00
1188
-4.4 1165
2.0
1179
-5.5
1150
2.5 1207
-9.1
1224 -1.4 1166
-6.5
1178
-1.0
2000-01
1063 -10.5 1081
-1.7
1023 -13.2
1062
-3.7 1137
-5.8
1146 -0.8 1121
-3.9
1097
2.2
2001-02
992
985
1095
43
1003
4.3
Appendix Table2e: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Aus
Season of Sylhet, Comilla, Noakhali and Chittagang Market during the Period of
1980-81 to 2001-02.
Market
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Chittagang
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Noakhali
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Comilla
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Year
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Sylhet
1980-81
542
521
530
1981-82
422 -22.1 524.3 -19.5
435 -16.5 525.3 -17.2
496
-6.4 574.3 -13.6
447
-6.3 515.7 -13.3
1982-83
609
44.3
557
9.3
620 42.5 573.3
697
1983-84
640
5.1
648
-1.2
1984-85
695
8.6 689.3
1985-86
733
5.5
1986-87
843
1987-88
859
1.9
871
-1.4
1988-89
911
6.1
910
0.1
1989-90
960
5.4 958.3
0.2
1001
2.7
1990-91
1004
4.6
1991-92
967
0.8
757
-3.2
15.0 811.7
3.9
665
7.3
681
758 14.0 728.7
8.1
-2.3
477
40.5
597 16.8
623
39.4 558.3
11.6
598 -14.2
689 -13.2
605
-2.9 642.7
-5.9
714
8.1
700
15.7
671
4.3
0.0 814.7 -5.2
708
1.1
776
-8.8
4.0
772
0.7
801
-4.7
772
882 15.6
851
3.6
900
16.6
908
2.9 921.7
-1.5
920
975
7.4 961.3
1.4
970
1012
-1.1 1011
763
29.1
864
4.2
920
29.9 855.3
7.6
2.2
930 -1.1
938
2.0 952.3
-1.5
5.4
967
999
6.5
1002
-0.3
4.2
1025 -1.4 1070
7.1
1066
0.3
0.3
977
2.8
1061
6.0
1043
1.7 1094
8.2
1057
3.5 1130
5.6
1092
3.5
-3.7 956.7
1.1
1068
0.7
1024
4.3 1067
-2.5
1046
2.0 1075
-4.9
1060
1.4
1992-93
899
-7.0 967.3
-7.1
943 -11.7
1027
-8.2
977
-8.4
1047 -6.7
975
-9.3
1054
-7.5
1993-94
1036
15.2 1030
0.6
1071 13.6
1085
-1.3 1097
12.3
1100 -0.3 1111
13.9
1113
-0.2
1994-95
1155
11.5 1123
2.8
1240 15.8
1173
5.7 1227
11.9
1153
6.4 1253
12.8
1197
4.6
1995-96
1179
2.1 1092
8.0
1207
3.2 1136
-7.4
1104
2.9 1228
1996-97
-2.7
1169
1061 -12.1
1166
2.3
1231 16.0
1195
942 -20.1 1077 -12.6
1997-98
1111
17.9 1086
1998-99
1205
8.5 1144
5.3
1292
5.0
1999-00
1116
-7.4 1135
-1.7
1180
-8.7
2000-01
1085
-2.8 1077
0.7
1132
-4.1
2001-02
1031
-9.0
949 -16.5
-2.0
1176
4.4
1062 -10.6 1048 -14.7
1144
-8.4
10.3
1133
2.1
3.0 1101
16.0
1087
1.3 1156
1234
4.7 1212
10.1
1171
3.5 1194
3.3
1158
3.1
1201
-1.8 1200
-1.0
1173
2.3 1124
-5.9
1123
0.1
1151
-1.7 1107
-7.8
1122 -1.4 1052
-6.4
1079
-2.5
1142
1060
44
1061
Appendix Table2f: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Aus
Season of Rangamati, Khagrachari and Bandarban Market during the Period of
1980-81 to 2001-02.
Market
1980-81
524
1981-82
1982-83
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Bandarban
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Khagrachari
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Year
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Rangamati
524
452
451 -13.9 577.3 -21.9
452 -13.7 577.7 -21.8
452
0.0 536.3 -15.7
757
67.8
757 67.5 635.3 19.2
705
56.0 619.3 13.8
1983-84
697
-7.9 726.7
-4.1
697
-7.9 726.7
-4.1
701
-0.6
1984-85
726
4.2 737.3
-1.5
726
4.2 737.3
-1.5
718
1985-86
789
8.7
787
0.3
789
8.7
-7.4
892
1986-87
846
7.2
835
1.3
957
8.8
959
7.5
939
2.1
1987-88
870
2.8 894.7
-2.8
1041
0.0
1081
-3.7
966
0.7
965
0.1
1988-89
968
11.3 972.3
-0.4
1160 11.4
1113
4.3
970
0.4 984.3 -1.5
1989-90
1079
11.5 1062
1.6
1137
-2.0
1160
-2.0 1017
4.8
1017
0.0
1990-91
1138
5.5 1104
3.1
1182
4.0
1156
2.3 1065
4.7
1054
1.0
1991-92
1094
-3.9 1065
2.7
1148
-2.9
1125
2.1 1081
1.5
1030
5.0
963 -12.0 1070 -10.0
1044
1992-93
635 19.2
1041 31.9
852
2.4 770.3 -6.8
24.2 856.3
-9.1
1115
3.0
1154 10.5
1147
0.6 1123
19.0
1109
1.3
1242
7.7 1205
3.1
1244
7.8
1206
3.1 1260
12.2
1199
5.1
1219
-1.9 1176
3.7
1221
-1.8
1185
3.0 1213
-3.7
1173
3.4
1996-97
1066 -12.6 1167
-8.6
1090 -10.7
1140
1997-98
1215
14.0 1225
-0.8
1110
1.8
1107
0.3 1164
11.4
1154
0.9
1998-99
1394
14.7 1304
6.9
1120
0.9
1126
-0.6 1253
7.6
1203
4.2
1999-00
1303
-6.5 1316
-1.0
1149
2.6
1161
-1.1 1191
-4.9
1137
4.7
2000-01
1250
-4.1 1271
-1.7
1215
5.7
1207
2001-02
1260
1153
1994-95
1995-96
1258
944 -12.7
4.2
19.7 1119
1993-94
-6.4
708 -1.0
-4.4 1045 -13.8
0.6
968 -18.7
1235
45
1049 -10.0
1141 -8.4
1131 -14.4
Appendix Table3a: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Boro
Season of Dinajpur, Rangpur, Bogra and Rajshahi Market during the Period of
1980-81 to 2001-02.
Market
1980-81
556
1981-82
762
1982-83
817
1983-84
778
1984-85
782
0.5
781
0.1
774
1985-86
783
0.1 823.7
-4.9
769
1986-87
906
15.7 869.7
4.2
1987-88
920
1.5 924.7
-0.5
1988-89
948
3.0
940
0.9
1989-90
952
0.4 974.3
-2.3
946
1990-91
1023
990
3.3
1024
8.2 990.7
1991-92
995
-2.7 945.3
5.3
1002
-2.1 951.7
1992-93
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Rajshahi
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Bogra
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Rangpur
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Year
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Dinajpur
528
556
7.1
769 45.6 640.3 20.1
761
36.9 687.33 10.7
807
64.7 673.7
19.8
7.2 785.7
4.0
624 -18.9 724.7 -13.9
745
-2.1 750.33 -0.7
724 -10.3 779.3
-7.1
-4.8 792.3
-1.8
781 25.2 726.3
7.5
745
0.0 748.67 -0.5
807
-0.9 774.7
-0.1
756
1.5
0.3
807
0.0
807
0.0
-0.6 812.3
-5.3
761
0.7 808.33 -5.9
807
0.0 853.7
-5.5
861
3.8
908
5.1
947
17.3 899.3
5.3
920
2.9 926.7
966
5.0
37.1 711.7
7.5
818 -17.8 948.3 -13.7
894 16.3
490
754
19.3 863.67
11.5 779.3
-0.7
922
1.5 925.67 -0.4
944
-0.3 940.7
944
2.3
947
2.7
939
0.9
931
-1.4
-2.1 978.7
-3.3
948
0.1
970 -2.3
945
7.1
984
3.4 1015
5.3
829 -17.3 950.3 -12.8
989
-2.6 957.67
3.2 1026
3.3
869 -12.1 964.33 -9.9
993
3.6
0.4
940
-1.0
1.5 967.3
-2.3
988
3.8
-3.2 960.7
8.6
3.4
863 -13.1
961 -10.2
1993-94
1032
26.2 1012
2.0
1020 23.0
1011
0.9 1035
19.1
1041 -0.6 1027
19.0
1033
-0.5
1994-95
1186
14.9 1112
6.7
1183 16.0
1107
6.8 1219
17.8
1163
4.8 1208
17.6
1130
6.9
1995-96
1117
-5.8 1067
4.7
1119
1053
6.2 1235
1.3 1138.3
8.5 1154
-4.5
1097
5.2
1996-97
897 -19.7 1054 -14.9
-5.4
858 -23.3
1046 -17.9
961 -22.2
2.6 1227
1141 -15.8
1997-98
1147
27.9 1144
0.3
1160 35.2
1130
1998-99
1387
20.9 1228 12.9
1373 18.4
1211 13.3 1419
1999-00
1151 -17.0 1179
-2.4
1101 -19.8
2000-01
1000 -13.1 1065
-6.1
1231 11.8
1119 10.0 1120
-4.6 1150.7 -2.7 1108
2001-02
1044
1158
1150
1100 -15.5
2.1 1216
30.9
1184
2.7
15.6 1273.3 11.4 1406
15.6
1264
11.2
1235 -10.9 1174 -17.3 1237.7 -5.1 1170 -16.8
1228
-4.7
1143
-3.0
1026
46
27.7 1202.3
929 -19.5
-5.3
Appendix Table3b: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Boro
Season of Pabna, Kushtia, Jessore and Khulna Market during the Period of 1980-81
to 2001-02.
Market
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Khulna
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Jessore
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Kushtia
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Year
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Pabna
1980-81
563
547
536
1981-82
783
39.1 700.7 11.8
825 50.8 698.7 18.1
804
1982-83
756
-3.4 769.3
-1.7
724 -12.2 791.3
-8.5
804
0.0
804
0.0
699
3.6
683
2.3
1983-84
769
1.7 767.7
0.2
825 14.0 791.3
4.3
804
0.0
804
0.0
675
-3.4
683
-1.2
1984-85
778
1.2 776.7
0.2
825
0.0
825
0.0
804
0.0
804
0.0
675
0.0
675
0.0
1985-86
783
0.6 840.7
-6.9
825
0.0 855.3
-3.5
804
0.0
856 -6.1
675
0.0 768.7 -12.2
1986-87
961
22.7 906.7
6.0
916 11.0
889
3.0
960
1987-88
976
1.6
976
0.0
926
1.1
926
0.0
962
0.2
1988-89
991
1.5 980.7
1.1
936
1.1
935
0.1
967
1989-90
975
-1.6 1012
-3.7
943
0.7 965.3
-2.3
992
2.6 1003.3 -1.1
1990-91
1070
9.7 1026
4.3
1017
7.8 974.3
1991-92
1034
3.9
963
-5.3 938.3
1992-93
-3.4
995
881 -14.8 984.7 -10.5
4.4 1051
2.6
835 -13.3 948.3 -12.0
993
520
50.0 714.67 12.5
19.4 908.67
675
29.8 631.3
6.9
5.6
956
41.6 868.7
10.1
963 -0.1
975
2.0 977.7
-0.3
0.5 973.67 -0.7 1002
2.8 984.3
5.9
1012
-5.5
970
866 -12.8
976
3.9 1032
2.4
976 -11.3
990
-2.6
1.8
1003
-2.7
5.7 999.3
3.3
-4.1 959.3
3.2
856 -13.5 966.7 -11.4
1993-94
1039
17.9 1034
0.5
1047 25.4
1019
2.8 1069
23.4 1054.7
1.4 1054
23.1
1041
1.2
1994-95
1181
13.7 1118
5.6
1174 12.1
1114
5.4 1229
15.0 1157.3
6.2 1213
15.1
1142
6.2
1995-96
1134
-4.0 1073
5.7
1120
1077
4.0 1174
-4.5
5.8 1159
-4.5
1089
6.4
1996-97
903 -20.4 1075 -16.0
-4.6
937 -16.3
1092 -14.2
1110
927 -21.0 1094.7 -15.3
1997-98
1189
31.7 1159
2.6
1218 30.0
1184
1998-99
1385
16.5 1233 12.3
1397 14.7
1241 12.6 1423
1999-00
1125 -18.8 1178
-4.5
1107 -20.8
1176
-5.9 1136 -20.2
2000-01
1023
-8.0
1025
1096
-6.5 1128
1138 -0.9 1131
2001-02
1188
-9.1 1112
-7.4
2.9 1183
1156
1150
47
27.6 1177.7
895 -22.8
1094 -18.2
0.5 1229
37.3
1176
4.5
20.3 1247.3 14.1 1405
14.3
1249
12.5
1229 -7.6 1112 -20.9
1216
-8.6
1130
0.1
-0.7
1148
1.7
Appendix Table3c: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Boro
Season of Barisal, Patuakhali, Mymensingh and Kishoreganj during the Period of
1980-81 to 2001-02.
478
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
1980-81
478
1981-82
487
1.9
485
0.4
487
1.9
485
0.4
478
-1.4
546 -12.5
478
-1.4
1982-83
490
0.6
489
0.2
490
0.6
489
0.2
675
41.2 610.33 10.6
675
41.2 610.3
10.6
1983-84
490
0.0 572.3 -14.4
490
0.0 571.3 -14.2
678
0.4 708.33 -4.3
678
0.4 708.3
-4.3
1984-85
737
50.4 645.7 14.1
734 49.8
2.2
772
13.9 755.3
2.2
1985-86
710
-3.7
783
5.7 856.67 -4.7
816
5.7 856.3
-4.7
1986-87
1013
981
20.2 934.7
5.0
1987-88
1014
994
2.0
930
6.3 934.7
-0.5 1000
1.8 1000.7 -0.1 1007
2.7
1009
1988-89
955
-5.8 1006
-5.0
999
7.4
1036
-3.6 1020
2.0 1008.7
1.1 1040
3.3
1020
2.0
1989-90
1048
9.7 1048
0.0
1180 18.1
1131
4.4 1006
-1.4 1043.7 -3.6 1012
-2.7
1056
-4.2
1990-91
1140
8.8 1080
5.6
1213
2.8
1148
5.6 1105
4.7 1117
10.4
1067
4.7
1991-92
1051
-7.8 1013
3.8
1052 -13.3
1033
1.9 1056
3.6 1073
-3.9
1039
3.3
820 -13.4
42.7 912.3 11.0
0.1
485
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Kishoreganj
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Year
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Market
Patuakhali
Mymensingh
Barisal
669
9.7
772
6.7 797.3
-1.8
816
875 11.7 862.7
1.4
982
1992-93
847 -19.4
929
-8.8
833 -20.8 944.7 -11.8
1993-94
889
5.0 964.3
-7.8
949 13.9 981.3
1994-95
1157
30.1 1068
8.3
1162 22.4
1995-96
1159
0.2 1086
6.7
1144
1996-97
943 -18.6 1061 -11.1
-1.5
885 -22.6
485
13.9 755.33
20.3 932.67
9.8 1055.7
-4.4
1019
5.3
896 -15.2 1016.7 -11.9
927 -13.6
546 -12.5
-0.2
1037 -10.6
-3.3 1098
22.5 1090.3
0.7 1112
20.0
1109
0.3
1085
7.1 1277
16.3 1198.3
6.6 1287
15.7
1208
6.5
1064
7.6 1220
-4.5 1147.3
6.3 1225
-4.8
1163
5.3
1010 -12.3
945 -22.5 1160.3 -18.6
978 -20.2
1173 -16.6
1997-98
1082
14.7 1121
-3.5
1000 13.0
1098
-8.9 1316
39.3 1231.7
6.8 1316
34.6
1271
3.5
1998-99
1338
23.7 1172 14.1
1408 40.8
1183 19.0 1434
9.0 1308.7
9.6 1519
15.4
1350
12.5
1999-00
1097 -18.0 1161
-5.5
1141 -19.0
1183
-3.6 1176 -18.0 1232.7 -4.6 1215 -20.0
1267
-4.1
2000-01
1049
-6.1
1000 -12.4
1051
-4.9 1088
1155
-7.5
2001-02
1205
-4.4 1117
1012
1109
48
-7.5 1124.3 -3.2 1068 -12.1
1182
Appendix Table3d: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Boro
Season of Jamalpur, Tangail, Faridpur and Dhaka Market during the Period of
1980-81 to 2001-02.
Market
1980-81
541
480
1981-82
487 -10.0 585.7 -16.8
502
1982-83
729
796 58.6
1983-84
654 -10.3 717.3
1984-85
769
1985-86
818
1986-87
982
1987-88
1988-89
49.7 623.3 17.0
17.6
-8.8
747
2.9
6.4 856.3
-4.5
536
4.6 592.7 -15.3
661 20.4
685 -13.9 756.3
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
8.3
626
-5.9
4.4
745
26.5 672.3
10.8
5.6 763.67 -0.7
683
-8.3 748.3
-8.7
815
7.5 760.33
19.6
776
1.5
878
-2.6
991 15.9 952.3
22.3 687.67
589
758
855
718
544
9.5 613.67 -4.3
-9.4
788 15.0
8.5
587
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Dhaka
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Faridpur
7.2
817
708 -13.1 822.33 -13.9
831
4.1
944
8.8
931
0.1
959
5.1
-3.3
4.9
1008
2.6 1008
0.0
1011
2.0
1011
0.0
951
0.7
1033
2.5 1007
2.6
1030
1.9
1014
1.6
955
0.4 954.33
0.1 1033
7.7
1016
1.6
1989-90
980
-5.1 1029
-4.8
1000
-2.9
1048
-4.6
957
0.2 982.67 -2.6 1057
2.3
1062
-0.5
1990-91
1074
9.6 1025
4.8
1115 11.5
1068
4.4 1036
1991-92
1021
-4.9 991.3
3.0
1088
1045
4.1
879 -13.9 995.3 -11.7
-2.4
931 -14.4
1051 -11.4
988
33.3 867.67
777
1.7 859.7
936
1992-93
20.0
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Tangail
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Year
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Jamalpur
950
12.0
907
2.6
3.0 974.3
-1.6
8.3 993.67
4.3 1096
3.7
1071
2.3
-4.6 966.33
2.2 1061
-3.2
1026
3.4
875 -11.4 980.67 -10.8
920 -13.3
1022 -10.0
1993-94
1086
23.5 1087
-0.1
1135 21.9
1121
1.2 1079
23.3
1065
1.3 1085
17.9
1086
-0.1
1994-95
1295
19.2 1216
6.5
1298 14.4
1223
6.1 1241
15.0
1177
5.4 1254
15.6
1195
4.9
1995-96
1267
-2.2 1175
7.8
1236
1164
6.2 1211
-2.4 1131.7
7.0 1247
-0.6
1155
8.0
1996-97
964 -23.9 1171 -17.7
-4.8
957 -22.6
1151 -16.9
943 -22.1 1137.7 -17.1
1997-98
1281
32.9 1267
1.1
1260 31.7
1235
1998-99
1555
21.4 1331 16.9
1488 18.1
1311 13.5 1535
1999-00
1156 -25.7 1295 -10.8
1186 -20.3
1235
2000-01
1175
1032 -13.0
1111
-7.1 1125
2001-02
1103
1.6 1145
2.6
2.0 1259
1074 -10.3
1.1 1012
5.1
21.9 1328.3 15.6 1442
42.5
1209
19.3
-4.0 1191 -22.4 1283.7 -7.2 1173 -18.7
1241
-5.5
1135
-2.4
1116
1200
49
33.5 1245.7
963 -22.8
-5.5
1172 -4.0 1108
1123
-5.5
1139 -11.2
Appendix Table3e: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Boro
Season of Sylhet, Comilla, Noakhali and Chittagang Market during the Period of
1980-81 to 2001-02.
Market
1980-81
574
1981-82
602
1982-83
748
1983-84
654 -12.6
1984-85
1985-86
1986-87
517
523
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Chittagang
523
-6.1
612 18.4 610.3
0.3
624
19.3 623.67
0.1
625
19.5 643.7
-2.9
668 12.0
702 14.7 683.7
2.7
724
16.0 694.33
4.3
783
25.3 704.3
11.2
704
-7.1
737
5.0 718.3
2.6
735
1.5 741.67 -0.9
705 -10.0 728.3
-3.2
710
8.6 714.3
-0.6
716
-2.8 757.7
-5.5
766
4.2
764
0.3
697
-0.4
779
9.7
809
-3.7
820 14.5
-3.1
791
3.3
853 -7.3
697
938
20.4
896
4.7
1987-88
971
3.5
979
-0.8
1017
1.5
1988-89
1028
5.9 1004
2.4
1035
1.8
1989-90
1014
-1.4 1051
-3.5
1026
1990-91
1111
9.6 1057
5.1
1991-92
1046
-5.9 1027
1.9
924 -11.7 1021
1992-93
4.9 641.3
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Noakhali
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Comilla
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Year
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Sylhet
24.3
846
1002 22.2 946.3
-1.1 699.7
0.0 790.7 -11.8
5.9 1002
26.7 932.33
7.5
978
40.3 887.7
10.2
1018
-0.1 1004
0.2 1004.3
0.0
988
1026
0.9 1007
-0.9
1063
-3.5 1040
1128
9.9
1082
4.2 1161
11.6 1112.3
1093
-3.1
1059
3.2 1136
-2.2
-0.7
3.0
1026
-0.7
3.3 1069.3 -2.7 1071
5.2
1078
-0.6
4.4 1145
6.9
1097
4.4
4.1 1075
-6.1
1057
1.7
952 -11.4
-9.5
955 -12.6
1060
1051
-9.4
1093
18.3 1099
-0.5
1131 18.4
1131
0.0 1143
17.1 1140.3
0.2 1126
18.3
1122
0.3
1994-95
1280
17.1 1234
3.8
1306 15.5
1241
5.2 1302
13.9
1232
5.7 1289
14.5
1200
7.4
1995-96
1328
1286
1194
7.7 1251
-3.9 1139.3
9.8 1184
-8.1
1157
2.3
3.8 1188 11.8
955 -28.1 1176 -18.8
1997-98
1244
30.3 1194
1998-99
1382
1999-00
2000-01
1125
2001-02
1155
-1.5
991 -22.9
1221 -18.9
976 -14.1
1091
1993-94
1996-97
-9.9
1.0 994.7
1017 -1.0 1018
0.3
865 -30.9
1086 -20.3
1387 40.0
1293
11.1 1278
8.2
1502
1359 10.5 1396
1207 -12.7 1238
-2.5
1188 -20.9
1260
-3.2
1090
1151
-5.3 1125
-1.1 1133.7 -0.8 1042
1138
1075
-6.8 1162
-8.2
1149 -13.0
0.7 1263
26.4
1220
3.6
22.2 1225.3 13.9 1397
10.6
1265
10.5
-5.7 1138 -18.5 1219.7 -6.7 1134 -18.8
1191
-4.8
1084
-3.8
1176
50
32.0 1134.3
999 -15.6
4.2
8.3
7.2 1142
1085 -10.0
-8.1
Appendix Table3f: Distribution of Marketwise Fluctuations of Boro Rice Prices in Boro
Season of Rangamati, Khagrachari and Bandarban Market during the Period of
1980-81 to 2001-02.
Market
1980-81
528
1981-82
658
24.6
1982-83
884
34.3 747.7 18.2
1983-84
701 -20.7 754.3
1984-85
1985-86
528
-4.6
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
528
-4.6
658
24.6 683.67 -3.8
884 34.3 802.3 10.2
865
31.5 793.33
-7.1
865
-2.1
876
-1.3
857
-0.9 869.67 -1.5
678
-3.3 755.3 -10.2
879
1.6
877
0.2
887
3.5 878.67
887
30.8
824
7.6
887
0.9 921.7
-3.8
892
0.6 924.33 -3.5
1986-87
907
2.3
901
0.7
999 12.6 961.7
3.9
994
11.4
960
3.5
1987-88
909
0.2 941.7
-3.5
999
0.0
1015
-1.5
994
0.0
970
2.5
1988-89
1009
11.0 989.3
2.0
1046
4.7
1031
1.5
922
1989-90
1050
4.1 1065
-1.4
1048
0.2
1085
-3.4
995
995
0.0
1990-91
1137
8.3 1087
4.6
1162 10.9
1109
4.7 1068
7.3 1035.3
3.2
1991-92
1075
-5.5 1047
2.7
1118
1065
5.0 1043
-2.3 1005.3
3.7
928 -13.7 1030
1992-93
690
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Bandarban
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Khagrachari
Deviation of seasonal price
from moving average
Moving average price (3year)
Changes from previous
year %)
Year
Seasonal price
(Tk./quintal)
Rangamati
658 24.6
-3.8
690
0.9
-7.2 970.33 -5.0
7.9
-9.9
914 -18.2
1993-94
1088
17.2 1074
1.3
1122 22.8
1104
1.6 1022
12.9 1042.3 -2.0
1994-95
1205
10.8 1161
3.8
1277 13.8
1227
4.1 1200
17.4
1995-96
1191
-1.2 1107
7.6
1281
1168
9.6 1216
1996-97
926 -22.3 1114 -16.9
1997-98
1226
32.4 1198
1998-99
1443
17.7 1301 10.9
1999-00
1233 -14.6 1283
2000-01
1174
2001-02
1200
-4.8 1202
2.3
0.3
947 -26.1
1051 -13.1
9.0
1154 -17.9
905 -13.2
990 -8.6
1146
4.7
1.3 1129.3
7.7
972 -20.1 1149.3 -15.4
1233 30.2
1135
8.7 1260
29.6 1178.7
6.9
1224
-0.7
1187
3.1 1304
3.5 1220.3
6.9
-3.9
1105
-9.7
1151
-4.0 1097 -15.9
-2.4
1123
1.6
1143
-1.7
1201
929 -15.3 1008.7 -7.9
1000
51
1110 -1.2