Pages

Tuesday, December 4, 2012

ECX is not an agricultural commodity exchange in the true sense of the word


"To leave market participants with no freedom of choice really just replaces previous single channel marketing systems with a new one. The ECX is certainly not an agricultural commodity exchange in the true sense of the word as it is effectively a single channel marketing system for a number of commodities."

This is an excerpt from an independent study carried out for COMPETE, a program funded by the United States Agency for International Development under the East Africa region. The draft copy of the report titled  COMMODITY EXCHANGES IN AFRICA BEST PRACTICES was filed on the COMPETE AFRICA website on December 6, 2011.


Whilst there is evidence that the ECX has been successful in terms of the volumes and values traded, this needs to be put into perspective as the Government of Ethiopia has legislated that all coffee and sesame trades have to be conducted across the exchange floor, the only exception being producers who can sell into the local or export markets directly.

The following quotes were received from market participants over the last six to twelve months:

1.     The ECX would have collapsed if the Government had not legislated that coffee MUST be traded across the Ethiopian Commodity Exchange Floor.
2.     It is an “absolute disaster”, which has undermined the coffee trade in Ethiopia and impacted negatively on exports.
3.     Under the auction system, the auction floor had samples ready for inspection by 1pm. Buyers, exporters and others could view samples and place bids on them. The trucks with the whole parcel were waiting outside, so there was no double handling and the commodity was kept in a better condition as a result. By 7pm, buyers could have twelve or more trucks delivering the commodity to their warehouses for processing. Any dispute as to weight or quality was sorted out by the auction floor, even after delivery.
4.     Farmers have not and do not benefit from the new marketing system, despite claims to the contrary.
5.     The coffee is owned by the traders, who buy it fro m the washing stations (no change from the previous system), who now HAVE to sell it across the ECX.
6.     The coffee is sold sight unseen and often both the quality and quantity paid for differs from what is subsequently collected.
7.     Collection is from one of three ECX run warehouses in Addis Ababa and can take up to four days to collect due to the number of trucks in the queue.
8.     A flat 2% commission is charged by ECX for every contract.
9.     The general feeling is that rather than enhance transparency, the ECX has made the coffee market much less transparent.
10.  The price has increased on ECX, not due to demand or the fact that farmers are getting more, but due to the system. The Exchange has set a price band for coffee to be traded, which does not take into account that 20% of the weight of the bean is in the parchment), thus making the coffee much more expensive. The levels set are also at the top end of the range for coffee, which usually only occur when there are shortages elsewhere.
11.  The lack of traceability has also impacted on exports as buyers look for coffee from a particular area, or even specific farms. Owing to the fact that the coffee sold on ECX is more of a generic nature, this is not possible any longer.
12.  Whilst discussing the ECX with a cooperative representative in Livingstone earlier this year, the indication was that they do not use the Exchange other than for the lowest grades as they are able to achieve higher prices by selling directly into niche markets.
13.  Earlier this month, we met a trader who uses the Exchange who indicated that he was now growing his own coffee in order to meet the demands of the niche market, which he has been unable to do when buying lots through the Exchange.The ECX is certainly not an agricultural commodity exchange in the true sense of the word as it is effectively a single channel marketing system for a number of commodities. At the recent Convening of African Commodity Exchanges in Ethiopia, indications were given that the list of commodities to be legislated for mandatory trade across the Exchange was likely to be increased, to incorporate most of the commodities produced.

Perhaps the most significant fact to emerge from all of this is that despite the volumes and value of trades conducted on ECX and the commissions charged by them, it is still not self sustainable.

Finally, the quotations below are from traders and other buyers who responded to questions put to them during an independent study carried out for USAID/COMPETE  to identify which market segment(s) provide the greatest opportunity to grow the value and volume of Eastern Africa coffee exports as well as define specific opportunities for the region to strengthen its position in the global coffee market and was completed in May, 2010.

Whilst not referring to the ECX specifically, some of these quotes do lend weight to observations made above. They also represent independent views on trade in coffee from Ethiopia.

A high percentage of respondents (27.8%) purchase a significant volume of coffee from Ethiopia (41-60%) and about half report paying USD$1.00 or more above market while another 37.3% reported paying $0.51 to $1.00 more.

While quality marks were good, 32.7% disagreed with the statement “It is easy to do business in this region” and a similarly high number (28.8%) disagreed with the statement “I am able to get sufficient information about the area or region where my coffee is grown”.

When asked about the most positive aspects of buying coffee from Ethiopia, nearly all of the responses were around unique and varied flavor profiles.

“Character, all across the board. The different regions and prep give us an entire array of flavors, aromas, and body.”

Challenges noted included inconsistency in product, price, traceability, transit times, and instability of business systems (including reliability of partners and recent changes).

(Response to greatest challenges with buying from Ethiopia): “Timely shipping, traceability, transparency, lack of direct relationships with growers”.

“The supply lines from the growing areas all the way to Djibouti port need to be totally overhauled. Shipments are regularly late by 2-3 months or even more”.

There was a strong sentiment of frustration about price not being commensurate with quality.

“....pricing tend to push them out of a lot of blends and I feel often the pricing is going to middlemen that provide little or no value in the chain. If I knew the farmer was getting most of the money, I probably wouldn't mind paying as much”

“Price. Sometimes the price is not worth the taste. Also consisting in processing (washed or natural)”.

“...price and better sorting out of defects”.

Government Driven Exchange

The Ethiopian Commodity Exchange (ECX) was established as a demutualized corporate entity with a clear separation of Ownership, Membership, and Management. Thus, owners cannot have a trading take, members cannot have any ownership stake, and the management can be neither drawn from the owners nor from the members. ECX is designed as a public-private partnership enterprise, in a unique institutional innovation for Ethiopia. At its inception, ECX is promoted by the Government of Ethiopia and this still applies to date. The corporate governance of ECX maintains a healthy balance of  owner and member interests. Thus, the Management Board is composed of Owner representatives and 5 Member representatives. As Owner, the Government of Ethiopia underwrites all performance risk of the Exchange related to the Exchange operated or appointed warehousing and grading of product, trading system, market information dissemination, and clearing and settlement. Members, for their part, are liable for contract performance on their own trades as well as of their Associates and Authorized Representatives.

There are obvious advantages to an exchange set up and operated with a large stake and interest from the Government, including the volumes of trade conducted across the Exchange and the “price discovery" that goes with that. However, there are also some disadvantages, including the question of price discovery as, where you have a single marketing channel, which it is compulsory to use one has to ask if this constitutes the best price opportunity or not, as the market has not really been tested.

To leave market participants with no freedom of choice really just replaces previous single channel marketing systems with a new one. The whole idea of a free market is that it is exactly what it says it is by providing participants with the freedom to choose when, where and how they want to buy or sell their commodities. In the case of Ethiopia, it has been legislated that anyone dealing in coffee (with a few listed exceptions) is required to become a member of the Ethiopian Commodity Exchange and to conduct all their business through the Exchange. Failure to do so would mean that they can no longer trade in coffee. Latest indications are that this requirement will be extended to include other agricultural commodities as well.

Arguments have been put forward that ensuring that all transactions are conducted through a single organisation, in this case the ECX; more order is brought to the market. Whilst this might be true, it can be argued that exchanges operating in countries elsewhere in the world, including India, the USA, Europe and South Africa for example, achieve the same result without having to make trade across them compulsory for all. These exchanges all operate on the basis of willing buyer and willing seller, who have the right to choose whether or not to do business through an exchange.

Aside from the lack of freedom of choice by market participants, the questions has to be asked as to whether or not the ECX provides real market transparency or not? Again, there seem to be two diverging opinions on this with the yes and no camps equally vocal in their views. Perhaps the real test of this will be whether or not international buyers will use the services of the Exchange in the longer run, although it is an open secret that buyers in the grain market are reluctant to do so in the current circumstances.

There remains an argument that the lack of freedom of choice by market participants to use the Exchange or not is a barrier to the free market. There is equally a valid argument regarding the transparency of the operations, compared to other exchanges elsewhere, as well as the lack of competition and the fact that effectively, for the moment at least, the ECX represents a form of single channel marketing. The question of the Exchange’s ability to supply the quality specified in the contract has also been questioned, but perhaps this can be put down to the fact that although the ECX is running and administering warehouses at the moment this is not, by their own admission, their core business but has become necessary due to the lack of expertise in the country.

That the ECX has made great strides in a short period of time cannot be denied. That this has been achieved largely by “home grown” talent is commendable indeed and all involved are to be congratulated on their achievements. At the end of the day though it will not matter what people say in reports such as these or what individuals choose to think about the ECX, but it will depend on the perception of the international trading communities as to how successful it will be. At the moment the ECX is on the crest of a wave but it is still early days and the next five years are likely to be crucial to the further development of the Ethiopian Commodity Exchange.

A recent development, which was highlighted at the Convening of African Exchanges in Addis Ababa, when it was disclosed that moves are afoot to legislate that a wider range of commodities be traded across the ECX, to capture those commodities produced in high volumes that are currently excluded. However, this needs to be put into context as one of the major coffee traders, who is on the board of the ECX, indicated that he is now growing his own coffee as farmers are exempt from having to use the Exchange and he wants to get back the niche markets that were lost when the Exchange commenced operations. Add to this the fact that despite all the volumes traded, the ECX is still not self sustainable and it will indeed be an interesting few years ahead for this Exchange.

Again, an exchange set up and operated through government legislation requiring that all trades, with a few exceptions, have to be conducted through the exchange is not ideal. Transparency is compromised, true market values are probably not realised by producers and quality issues are likely to arise, as has happened in Ethiopia. Volumes are likely to be high, as there are no alternatives, but neither is there likely to be much incentive to increase production if there is only one market to sell through.
----