Agric. Econ. - Czech, 2012, 58(5):222-238 | DOI: 10.17221/51/2011-AGRICECON

Development of agricultural trade and competitiveness of the commodity structures of individual countries of the Visegrad Group

Miroslav SVATO©, Luboą SMUTKA
Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Management, Czech University of Life Science in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic

The paper analyzes the development of the value, commodity and territorial structure and competitiveness of agricultural trade of the countries of the Visegrad Group in 1993-2008. Over the years, there has been a sharp increase not only to the volume, but also to the value of the traded agricultural products. The territorial structure of both exports and imports has narrowed to a decisive extent, primarily to the trade with the countries of the EU27. The commodity structure of agricultural trade has adapted very strongly both to the world and especially to the European market and it has furthermore reacted to the changes in the structure of the individual national markets. In the course of the years, the commodity structure has profiled so that there has been a limitation of aggregation with a strong comparative advantage on the market of the EU countries in relation to the aggregations that did not held this advantage. The analysis that has been performed indicates that the process of the accession to the EU has been reflected positively in the results of agricultural trade especially in the case of Poland. In the case of the Czech Republic and Slovakia, the entry into the EU likewise has not led to a worsening of the results in the area of agricultural trade. Only in the case of Hungary, one does find serious structural problems after the entry into the EU in the case of agricultural trade. It can be assumed that these problems can be attributed for the most part to the Hungary's current economic problems.

Keywords: competitiveness, Visegrad Group, agricultural trade, commodity structure, value

Published: May 31, 2012  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
SVATO© M, SMUTKA L. Development of agricultural trade and competitiveness of the commodity structures of individual countries of the Visegrad Group. Agric. Econ. - Czech. 2012;58(5):222-238. doi: 10.17221/51/2011-AGRICECON.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Asuming-Brempong S. (2004): The Role of Agriculture in the Development Process: Recent Experiences from Ghana. In: Inaugural Symposium, December 6-8, 2004. Available at http://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ags:aaaeke:9527
    2. Balassa B. (1965): Trade liberalization and 'revealed' comparative advantages. The Manchester School of Economic and Social Studies, 32: 99-123. Go to original source...
    3. Bielik P. et al. (2010): Economics, Social Policy and citizenship in the EU evidence of V4 countries and perspectives for Ukraine. SPU, Nitra; ISBN 978-80-552-0448-2.
    4. Bojnec ©., Fertő I. (2011): Information and communication infrastructure development and agro-food trade. Agricultural Economics - Czech, 57: 64-70. Go to original source...
    5. Ciaian P., Swinnen J.F.M. (2006): Land market imperfections and agricultural policy impacts in the new EU member states: a partial equilibrium analysis. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 88: 799-815. Go to original source...
    6. Csáki C. (2009): Global, regional and local challenges in Hungarian agriculture. Society and Economy, 31: 45 -70. Fertő I. (2001): Rural development and transition in Hungarian agriculture. In: European Rural Development: Problems, Chances, Research Needs' jointly organised by the International Institute for Applied Analysis (IIASA), Laxenburg, Austria, and the Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, May 7-9. Go to original source...
    7. Hinloopen J., van Marrewijk C. (2001): On the empirical distribution of the Balassa index. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv/Review of World Economics, 137: 1-35. Go to original source...
    8. Hinloopen J., van Marrewijk C. (2006): Empirical relevance of the Hillman condition for revealed comparative advantage: 10 stylized facts. Applied Economics, 40: 2313-2328. Go to original source...
    9. Hisanaga M. (2007): Comparative Advantage Structure of U.S. International Trade. Kyoto Institute of Economic Research, June. Available at www.kier.kyoto-u.ac.jp/ index.html (accessed 2011-05-05).
    10. Horská E. et al. (2011): European Studies on Intercultural Dimension of International Business. SPU, Nitra; ISBN 978-80-552-0530-4.
    11. Horská E., Hambálková M. (2008): Internacionálizácia agropotravinárských podnikov (Internationalization of Agrarian and Food Stuff Enterprises.) SPU, Nitra; ISBN 978-80-552-0136-8.
    12. Jeníček V. (2009): The role of foreign trade and its effects. Agricultural Economics - Czech, 55: 211-220. Go to original source...
    13. Liesner H.H. (1958): The European common market and British industry. Economic Journal, 68: 302-316. Go to original source...
    14. Kotler P. (2007): Principles of Marketing. 4 th European ed. Grada, Prague; ISBN 978-80-247-1545-2, EAN 9788024715452.
    15. Pokrivcak J., Ciaian P. (2004): Agricultural reforms in Slovakia. Finance a úvěr - Czech Journal of Economics and Finance, 54: 420-435.
    16. Pokrivčák J., Drábik D. (2008): Agricultural Trade in Central and Eastern Europe. 1 st ed. SPU, Nitra; ISBN978-80552-0139-9.
    17. Pokrivčák J. (2009): International economics [online]. Available at www.fem.uniag.sk/Jan.Pokrivcak/me_readings. htm (accessed 2009-02-13).
    18. Proudman J., Redding S. (2000): Evolving patterns of international trade. Review of International Economics, 8: 373-396. Go to original source...
    19. Qineti A., Rajcaniova M., Matejkova E. (2009): The competitiveness and comparative advantage of the Slovak and the EU agri-food trade with Russia and Ukraine. Agricultural Economics - Czech, 55: 375-383. Go to original source...
    20. Qineti A., Smutka L. (2011): The Agrarian Trade Transformation in the Visegrad Countries. In: 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    21. Svatoą M., Smutka L., Miffek O. (2010): Competitiveness of agrarian trade of EU-15 countries in comparison with new EU member states. Agricultural Economics - Czech, 56: 569-582. Go to original source...
    22. Svatoą M., Smutka L. (2009a): Analysis of Visegrad group countries' foreign trade commodity and territorial structure. Scientia Agriculturae Bohemica, 40: 164-177.
    23. Svatoą M., Smutka L. (2009b): Influence of EU enlargement on agrarian foreign trade development in member states. Agricultural Economics - Czech, 55: 233-249. Go to original source...
    24. Svatoą M., Smutka L. (2010): Development of agricultural foreign trade in the countries of Central Europe. Agricultural Economics - Czech, 56: 163-175. Go to original source...
    25. Smutka L., Voloąin J., Svatoą M. (2011): Vývoj agrárního zahraničního obchodu ČR v evropském a světovém kontextu. (Agrarian Foreign Trade Development CR in European and World Context.) Power Print, Praha.
    26. Tang L. (2006): Communication costs and trade of differentiated goods. Review of International Economics, 14: 54-68. Go to original source...
    27. Tuček P. (2006): Ročenka agrárního zahraničního obchodu za rok 2004. (Yearbook of Agrarian Foreign Trade in the Year 2004.) VUZE, Praha; ISBN: 80-86671-33-X.
    28. Udovec G., Popp J., Potori N. (2008): New challenges for Hungarian agriculture. Studies in Agricultural Economics No. 108. Research Institute of Agricultural Economics (AKI), Budapest, pp. 19-32.
    29. Wagner H., Juhász A. (2009): The Impacts of the Crisis in the Foreign Trade of the Hungarian Food Economy in an International Context. AKI, Budapest; ISBN 978963-491-541-6.
    30. UN Comtrade (2010): UN trade database. Available at http://comtrade.un.org/db/ (accessed 2009-02-13).
    31. Utkulu U., Seymen D. (2004): Revealed Comparative Advantage and Competitiveness: Evidence for Turkey vis-à-vis the EU/15. In: European Study Group 6th Conference, ETSG 2004, Nottingham, September.
    32. Vajda L., Baksa A. (2008): Major changes in Hungarian agricultural economy as a result of EU - membership, Gazdálkodás, 52 (Special Edition No. 22): 2-16.
    33. Voloąin J. (2004): Analýza agrárního zahraničního obchodu ČR se státy CEFTA v letech 1997-2003 a jeho predikce po roząíření EU. (The Analysis of Agrarian Foreign Trade of the Czech Republic in Relation to CEFTA Member in 1997-2003 and its Prediction after the EU Accession.) VUZE, Praha; ISBN 80-86671-19-4.
    34. Voloąin J. a kol. (2011): Analysis of external and internal influences on CR agrarian foreign trade. Agricultural Economics - Czech, 57: 422-435. Go to original source...
    35. Weisz M., Péter E. (2011): Hungarian agricultural and retail trade in a competitive environment. International Journal of Agriculture: Research and Review, 1: 133-137.

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content