ความสามารถในการผลิตข้าวโพดเลี้ยงสัตว์ของประเทศไทยเพื่อทดแทนการนำเข้า

Abstract

Maize is an important crop and ingredients in the feed industry in Thailand. Since 1991, quantity of maize produced in the country is inadequate to the needs of the feed industry and has increased the need to rely on imports from abroad. This study analyzed the ability of maize production in Thailand for import substitution. Three objectives were as follows; 1) to describe assess production practices, marketing, trade policy from maize production Thailand, 2) to analyze the ability of maize production in Thailand for import substitution, and 3) to study independent variables that affect ability of maize production in Thailand for import substitution. The statistical data from 1990-2012 was collected from Office of Agricultural Economics, Department of Internal Trade and Customs Department. Vatter’s model (1969) was used to analysis the ability of maize production for import substitution. The model comprised of three indicators; i.e. the gross import substitution (GIS), import replacement ratio (IR) and import substitution ratio (B). The multiple linear regression was used to analyze factors affecting these 3 indicators. Maize is grown in two seasons, i.e. wet and dry seasons. The main planting of maize in Thailand was in the wet season. Maize planted area and production in the wet season were approximately 95 and 97 percent of those for all season respectively. During 1990-2012, the total planted area and production of maize in Thailand were averaged at 7,855,426 rais and 4,218,803 metric tons respectively. The Northern region occupied 53.12 percent of the total area planted to maize. It followed by the North-Eastern region (26 percent) and the Central region (20.72 percent). There were three levels of maize market in Thailand. They were farm-gate, assembly wholesale and terminal markets. The terminal market was located in Bangkok where there were many large feed and other maize processing factories. The domestic price of maize in Thailand was influenced by the Chicago’s price. Farm-gate price of maize was determined according to Free on Board price, import’ s price, production quantity, quality, government’ s policies and its market situation. The government of Thailand has launched many measures increase domestic maize production such as pledging scheme and production income guarantee. At the same time, Thailand has been a member of both AFTA and WTO. Since 1995, Thailand has widely opened its maize market with lower levels of import tariff according to its agreement toward WTO’s regulation on maize. The results of maize import substitution study during 1992-2012 (1991 as base year)revealed that the average gross import substitution of maize production was 142,373 tons (GIS=142,373). On the other hand, the average import replacement ratio of maize production was 0.19 (IR=0.19). It implies that there was 20 percent of the net increase in quantity of maize production that substituted maize importation. Likewise, the average import substitution ratio of maize production was 0.45 (B=0.45). This means that quantity of maize import substitution was 45 percent of total maize that should be consumed each year. The above indicators suggested that ability of maize production in Thailand for import substitution was considerably low as indicating clearly by only 19 percent of maize production was used as import substitution. Results from the analysis of factors affecting the 3 import substitution indicators revealed that yield of maize (YIE), lagged price index of competing crops (PICC) and Thailand’s joining to the World Trade Organization (WTO) agreement on maize were statistically affecting the gross import substitution (GIS), and import substitution ratio (B). While only Thailand joining to the WTO’s agreement on maize could statistically affecting the import replacement ratio (IR). Based on these findings, it could be concluded that PICC and WTO were negatively associated with ability of maize production in Thailand for import substitution. On the other hand, yield of maize was positively contributing to its ability for import substitution in case of maize. Therefore, Thai government should try to limit its maize importation and out-quota tariff according to its minimum access and tariff levels it has agreed with WTO. On the otherhand, Thailand should also try to increase maize productivity per unit of land. Such attempt could also build up Thailand’s ability of maize production for import substitution.