AGRICULTURAL EXPORT PERFORMANCE p. 18. 4.1. Growth of Agricultural Production, 1846-1926 p. 18. 4.2. Growth of Agricultural Exports, 1846-1926 p. 15.
DUTCHAGRICULTURAL EXPORT PERFORMANCE
**•»
Jm I»
DUTCHAGRICULTURAL EXPORTPERFORMANCE (1846 -1926)
drs. Dirk Pilat
-MUSEUMLAND 1 9 8 8
NederlandsAgronomisch-Historisch Instituut Groningen 1989
Historia Agriculturae XIX Published by/ uitgegeven door Nederlands Agronomisch-Historisch Instituut (NAHI), Oude Kijk in 'tJatstraat 26, 9712 EK Groningen, tel.050-635949
CIP-gegevens Pilat, Dirk Dutch agricultural export performance (1846-1926) / Dirk Pilat.-Groningen, Stichting Nederlands Agronomisch-Historisch Instituut.-Graf.,Tab.-(Historia Agriculturae, ISSN 0439-2027;19).-Met lit.opg. ISBN 90 367 0172 4 Previously published as / eerder verschenen als Research Memorandum nr 296 from the Institute of Economie Research, Faculty of Economics, University of Groningen. Copyright 6 1989 Nederlands Agronomisch-Historische Instituut Vormgeving omslag: Edward Houting, Groningen. Zetwerk: Henk Hansen Fotozetterij, Veendam. Drukwerk: Scholma Druk, Bedum. Bindwerk: Stronkhorst & Van der Esch, Groningen.
PREFACE DutchAgriculturalExportPerformanceismeanttobethefirstoftwovolumes on the evolution of Dutch agricultural production over the period 18501950.The second, in preparation byM.Knibbeand to appear shortly,will present serial values of national production at both current and constant prices,whilealsoanattemptwillbemadetoprovidesomeestimatesofcosts and net values added. Bothstudiesspringfrom amorebroadlybasedresearchprojectontherecent historyofproductivityandincomeinDutchagriculture,initiatedattheInstitute of Economic Research of Groningen State University. Preliminary resultswerepresentedinapapergivenbyCJ.L.vanderMeerandB.vanArk at a workshop on economic growth in Northwestern Europe (Groningen, 1985) and afterwards published inResearch Memorandum nr.214 (1987) from thesameInstitute. Theresearchofwhichthepresentvolumeistheresult,wascarriedoutunder the supervision of Prof.dr. Angus Maddison and dr. Cees van der Meer (FacultyofEconomics,Groningen).Prof.dr.JanLuitenvanZanden(Faculty ofEconomics,'Vrije'UniversityofAmsterdam)istobethankedforhiscareful and criticalreadingofthefinal draft. Drs.P.C.M.Hoppenbrouwers, Head oftheDutchInstituteof Agricultural History (NAHI).
Ill
TABLEOF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION II. DUTCHFOREIGN TRADE STATISTICS, 1800-1950 2.1. Thedevelopment ofDutchtradestatistics 2.2. DeStatistiekvandenIn-,Uit-enDoorvoer 2.3. OthersourcesonDutchtrade ffl. THEMEASUREMENT OFAGRICULTURAL EXPORTS 3.1. BasicMaterialandClassification 3.2. Quantity Standards 3.3. DisguisedTransitTrade 3.4. CalculationofQuantityIndices 3.5. MethodologicalAppraisal
p. 1 p. 4 p. 4 p. 5 p. 7 p. 8 p. 8 p. 9 p. 9 p. 10 p. 12
IV. AGRICULTURAL EXPORTPERFORMANCE
p. 18
4.1. GrowthofAgriculturalProduction, 1846-1926 4.2. GrowthofAgricultural Exports, 1846-1926 4.3. FurtherAnalysis
p. 18 p. 15 p. 24
V. SUMMARYANDCONCLUSIONS
p.28
TABLES 1. AgriculturalExportsandProduction 2. GrowthofAgriculturalExports 3. ShareofSubsectorsinTotalAgriculturalExports 4. ExportsperAgriculturalWorker 5. ComparisonwithVanArk'sResults
p. 3 p. 17 p. 19 p. 24 p. 27
FIGURES 1. VolumeofTotalAgriculturalExports 2. VolumeofExportsofUnprocessedArableCrops 3. VolumeofExportsofUnprocessed LivestockProducts 4. VolumeofExportsofUnprocessed HorticulturalProducts 5. VolumeofExportsofProcessed ArableProducts 6. VolumeofExportsofProcessed LivestockProducts
p. 16 p.20 p. 20 p. 22 p. 22 p.22
V
7. VolumeofExportsofProcessedHorticultural Products 8. AgriculturalExportsperCapita 9. AgriculturalProduction andExports 10. ShareofExportsinTotalProduction
p. 22 p. 25 p.26 p.26
APPENDIX A:METHODOLOGICAL NOTES
p. 31
A.1. Classification ofAgriculturalExports A.2. Recalculation ofQuantityStandards A.3. Correctionfor DisguisedTransitTrade A.4. ProductsinQuantityIndex A.5. PricesandPrice-indices A.6. AnalysisofSummaryGroups
p. 31 p. 34 p. 35 p. 37 p. 39 p.44
FIGURES A.1.1. ExportsofButterandCheese A.3.1. TradeinOats, 1846-1916 A.5.1. PriceIndexUnprocessed ArableCrops A.5.2. PriceIndexUnprocessed Livestock A.5.3. PriceIndexProcessed ArableProducts A.5.4. PriceIndexProcessed LivestockProducts A.5.5. PriceIndexHorticultureandProducts A.5.6. PriceIndexTotalAgriculture A.6.1. VolumeofExports ofAllUnprocessed Products A.6.2. VolumeofExportsofAllProcessed Products A.6.3. VolumeofExportsofAllArableCropsandProducts A.6.4. VolumeofExportsofAllLivestockandProducts A.6.5. VolumeofExportsofAll HorticultureandProducts APPENDIX B:MAINRESULTS
p.33 p. 35 p.40 p.41 p.41 p.42 p.42 p.43 p.45 p.45 p.46 p.46 p.47 p.48
TABLES B.I.A. ExportQuantityIndices,UnprocessedArableCrops p. 50 B.l.B. ExportQuantityIndices,Unprocessed Livestock p. 53 B.l.C. ExportQuantityIndices,Unprocessed Horticulture p.56 B.I.D. ExportQuantityIndices,Processed ArableProducts p. 59 B.l.E. ExportQuantityIndices,Processed LivestockProducts p.62 B.l.F. ExportQuantityIndices,Processed HorticulturalProductsp. 65 B.2. Export QuantityIndicesofSummaryGroups p.68
VI
B.3. AgriculturalExportsatCurrentPrices B.4. SharesinTotalAgriculturalExports B.5. AgriculturalExportsperCapita B.6. AgriculturalProduction andExports B.7. ExportPriceIndices,MainGroups APPENDIX C:BASICPRICESANDQUANTITIES
p. 72 p. 75 p. 77 p. 79 p.81 p.83
TABLES C1.A. ExportQuantities,Unprocessed ArableCrops C.l.B. ExportQuantities,Unprocessed Livestock C.l.C. Export Quantities,Unprocessed Horticulture C.I.D. ExportQuantities,Processed ArableProducts CLE. Export Quantities,Processed LivestockProducts C.LF. ExportQuantities,Processed HorticulturalProducts C.2.A. BasicPrices,Unprocessed ArableCrops C.2.B. BasicPrices,Unprocessed Livestock C.2.C. BasicPrices,AllHorticultural Products C.2.D. BasicPrices,ProcessedArableProducts C.2.E. BasicPrices,Processed LivestockProducts
p.84 p. 90 p.96 p. 100 p. 104 p. 110 p. 112 p. 116 p. 118 p. 120 p. 122
NOTES
p. 125
BIBLIOGRAPHY
p. 128
VII
I. Introduction* AsArthurLewisandotherwellknownauthorshavenoted(1),littlehardstatistical information is available on the process of economic growth in the Netherlandsbefore the 1920s.Thisdeficiency isespeciallystrikingincomparisonwithotherindustrial countries.Hardlyanyinformation isavailable onprice-movementsduringthenineteenthcenturyoronthedevelopmentof foreign tradebefore 1923.Noofficial seriesonthistopicexist,thoughthere aresomeroughandunreliableestimatesbyindividualresearchers. For an open economy like the Netherlands, information on exports and importsisofgreatrelevance.ThepreviouslackofsuchserieshasbeenaseriousproblemintheanalysisofDutcheconomicgrowth.Variousauthorshave tried to deal with the problem by making proportionate adjustments to excludetransittrade.Suchestimateshavenofirmrationaleandthisstudyestimates disguised transit trade more carefully. It discusses (2) the problems whichariseinusingDutchtradestatistics,thesocalled"StatistiekvandenIn-, Uit-enDoorvoer"(StatisticsonImports,ExportsandTransitTrade),henceforthreferredtoasSIUD,for 1846-1916.Somecorrectiontechniquesarediscussedandareappliedtoagriculturalexports.Theagriculturalsectorisquite important,asin1923itaccountedforsome40percentoftotalDutchexports (3).Alsoitisprobablythemostsimplesectortoanalyse,becauseoftherelativeabundanceofothersourcesonthissector.Weareparticularyinterestedin thissectorbecauseofitsrelevancefor arelatedresearchproject (4)forestimationoftotalagriculturalproduction andprices. The following section considers Dutch foreign trade statistics in the nineteenth and early twentieth century.Wediscuss the development of foreign trade statistics over time and their shortcomings.Other sourceson foreign tradearealsotakeninaccount. InthethirdsectiontheshortcomingsofDutchforeigntradestatisticsareanalysed and some techniques discussed to calculate quantity indices. These techniquesareappliedindetailtotheagriculturalsector.Theindex-number problemandthevariousapproachestoindex-numbersinthemeasurementof
* TheauthorisindebtedtoCeesvanderMeerforhishelpandadviceatallstagesoftheresearch. HealsowishestothankAngusMaddisonforhisdetailedcommentsonearlierdrafts.Inearlier stagesoftheresearch, adviceandhelpfrom GeurtCollenteurandMerijnKnibbealso wereof greatimportance.
1
economicgrowtharediscussed.Ourmethodsandcalculationsarepresented insufficient detailtomakereplicationorextensiontootherstudiespossible. Thefourthsectionanalysesourfindingsinalong-termperspective.Thefindingsarecompared withother studiesfor thisperiod.Different conceptsof agriculturalexportsareanalysedandacomparisonismadebetweenourfindings and data on production, population and the agricultural workforce. Whereasthefirst part ofthisstudydealsmainlywithmethodological problems,thesecondismainlyanalytical.Thedevelopment ofDutch agriculture inthenineteenthandtheearlytwentiethcenturyisconsidered,aswellasthe roleofforeign tradeinthisdevelopment. Fourphasesweredefined regardingagriculturalexportgrowth: 1. 1846-1875 Rapid growth of agricultural exports, especially of unprocessedproductsandhorticulture.Thiswascausedbyadeclineinprotectionism in neighbouring countries from 1846 onwards, enhanced economicgrowthinmostEuropeancountriesandimprovedopportunities for internationaltrade. 2. 1875-1883 Declining export performance, due to a combination of; -increasedinternationalcompetition,especiallyforarablecropsandproducts,fromthenewgrainexportingcountriestheUnitedStates,Argentina andRussia.AlsoforsomelivestockproductsthequalityofDutchproducts diminished, which caused the loss of some export markets to foreign competitors. -stagnatingproduction.TheincreasedforeigncompetitioncausedanagriculturalcrisisinmostofEurope.Thestagnatingproductionleftlessscope for exportsofdomesticsurplusses; -increased domesticconsumption,duetorisingpercapitaincomes; 3. 1883-1914Rapidgrowthofexports,especiallyforprocessedandhorticulturalproducts.Theagriculturalcrisisofthelate1870scausedthissubstitution from unprocessed to processed and horticultural products. Furthermore,enhancedeconomicgrowthinEuropeandastrongurbanisationcausedagrowingmarketfortheseprocessedandhorticulturalproducts. 4. 1914-1926DeclineofexportperformanceduetotheFirstWorldWarand rapid recovery afterwards. Exports ofprocessed products remained ata veryhighlevelinthefirst yearsoftheWar,duetolargeGermanimports. Horticulturewasclearlythestrongestgrowingsector.Itsshareintotalagriculturalexportsrosefrom 2in 1846to 17 percentin 1926.Theroleofexports increased overthewholeperiod.
Furthermore,totalagriculturalexportsrosefasterthanproduction.Thisindicatesthegrowingimportanceoftheworldmarketfor agricultural products for Dutchagriculture. Anothercleartrendinagriculturalexportsafter 1871wasthegradualsubstitutionofunprocessedbyprocessedexportsandhorticulturalproducts.This developmenthadalreadystartedintheearly1870sbutwasfurther enhanced bythe agricultural crisisinthe 1880s.The high levelofDutch agricultural exportsinthefirstyearsofWorldWarIwasremarkable.Thiswascausedby increasedexportsofprocessedproducts(bread,butter,cheese)andhorticulturalproducts (especiallypreservedvegetables)toGermany. Intable 1somemainfacts onagricultural production and exports arepresented. Table1 AgriculturalExportsandProduction Agricultural Agricultural Exports Production (atcurrentprices, thousand guilders) 1846 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1913 1920 1926
n.a. n.a. n.a. 409,415 450,332 426,288 491,634 702,638 808,393 2,061,342 1,585,478
35,810 42,681 86,867 145,154 144,704 142,851 200,533 330,283 411,423 541,237 631,695
Shareof Exports (%)
n.a. n.a. n.a. 35.5 32.1 33.5 40.8 47.0 50.9 26.3 39.8
Agricultural Exports per Capita (index, 1860=100) 61 74 100 143 119 138 172 202 228 123 225
Source:Appendix tableB.5andB.6.
Note: Agriculturalproductionhereconsistsonlyofunprocessedagricultural products.Theexportsfigures doincludeprocessed productsaswell, n.a.:notavailable
Thefifth sectiondrawssomeconclusionsontherelevanceofour approach andresultsforfurtherresearch,thepossibilitiesoffered byourmethodforreestimationoftheseries,andthedevelopmentofagricultureandespeciallythe roleofexportsinthis.Intheappendices,detailed information isoffered on sources,methodsand findings.
II. DutchForeignTradeStatistics, 1800-1950 2.1. TheDevelopmentofTradeStatisticsintheNetherlands Dutchforeigntradestatisticsovertheperiod 1800-1950canbedividedinto three sub-periods.For the first period 1800-1845 welack any systematic account.Statisticswerepublishedfor onlyafewyears. Afirst sourcefor tradeinthisperiodisthedatasuppliedbyD'Alphonse(5) for 1802-1809.Theselikealmostalldatainthisperiodconsistonlyoftrade values.Gogel(6)alsosuppliesdatafor 1802-1809andfor 1814-1816.From 1817onwardstheDepartmentofFinancegatheredinformation ontrade(7). Thiswasnot published and served onlyasmaterialfor policy-making.For 1825-1829 several sources exist, the most official probably being the "Tweede"and"DerdeverzamelingvanStatenuitgegevendoordecommissie voordeStatistiek"(8).AcomparablesourceisDrieling(9)whosuppliesdata for 1824-1827.VanDen Bogaerde (10)provides data for 1825-1829.The "Staatscourant" of 12 december 1845 no. 294 publishes data on foreign tradefortheyears 1843and 1844.Allthesesourcessupplyinformation on consecutive years, Doorman (11) published information on 1808, 1816, 1843and 1844.AllsourcesnamedherecoveredallproductsinDutchtrade. Othersourcesdealonlywithsomeproductsandhavenotbeenconsideredin thisstudy. Weconclude regarding our first sub-period, that no systematic account of tradeisavailable.Itmightbepossibletochaintheknownyearsintoalongterm seriesand add this seriestolater periods.The sourcesfor this period only supply information on values, so one needs information on prices to deriveindicationsofvolumedevelopments.Themostseriousprobleminthis periodisprobablytheunionwithBelgiumintheyears 1815-1830.Anindex onthatperiodisthereforenotpossible,withoutmakingestimateswithregard tothesharesofthenorthern and southern part oftheNetherlands intotal trade aswell asinternal trade between thenorthern and southern Netherlands.
Thesecondperiod 1846-1916,startswiththeappearanceoftheofficial"Statistiek van den Handel en de Scheepvaart van het Koningrijk der Nederlanden" (Statistics on Trade and Shipping on the Kingdom of the Netherlands),replacedin 1877bytheearliernamed SIUD.ByRoyalDecisiononthethirdofnovember 1847no.64(12)permissionwasgranted for the publication of public trade statistics on theyear 1846.These statistics appeared thereafter onayearlybase.SIUDprovidestableson: -AlgemeneInvoer (Allimports,includingtransittrade) -AlgemeneUitvoer (Allexports,includingtransit trade) -InvoertotVerbruik (Imports,excludingtransit trade) -UitvoeruithetVrijeVerkeer (Exports,excludingtransit trade) -Doorvoer metoverlading(Transittrade,including transshipment) -Doorvoer zonder overlading(Transittrade,excludingtransshipment) Therearealsosometablesonshippingandinformationontradewithvarious countriesincludedinthestatistics(13). Fromthesetables onlythose on "Invoer totverbruik" and "Uitvoer uithet vrije verkeer" are important for our purpose.These supply price, quantity and valueinformation excludingtransit trade and aretherefore mostpertinent for the analysis of economic growth within the Netherlands.At first glance,theseseemtooffer agoodscopefortheestimationofDutch foreign tradefigures.Further analysis,however,showssomeseriousproblems. Thethirdperiodstartsin1917whenSIUDbecamethe"Jaarstatistiekvande In-, Uit- en Doorvoer" (Annual.Statistics on Import, Export and Transit Trade).Theclassification hereshowsindustryoforiginordestination.Currentvaluesandactualquantitiesaregiven,fromwhichunitvaluescanbecalculated.TheDutch CentralBureau ofStatistics (CBS)used these statistics withoutseriousproblemstoconstruct seriesfortheperiod 1921-1939(14). 2.2. DeStatistiekvandenIn-, UitenDoorvoer Themainsourcefortheperiodafter 1846isSIUD.Thesehavesomeserious shortcomings(15): A. Mistakesinthebasicmaterial Thebasicmaterial,suppliedbythecustomsdepartment,wasnotalways reliable,forthefollowing reasons(16): a. Lack of control by and thelowqualifications of theresponsible officials.
b. Fraud byimporters or exporters onthereported values of products whicharestated inSIUDintermsofvalue.Iftheresponsible department suspected this was the case,it was possible to raise the stated value by 10%.Unfortunately the official usually could not make a proper estimateofactual values. c. Thereisaseriouspossibilitythatnotalltradewascoveredinthestatistics. B. Disguised transit trade Customsformalitiesoffered twopossibilitiesforatraderincaseoftransit trade: 1.Declaration astransit trade 2. Declarationofgoodsfirstasimports,thereafter asexports whenleavingthecountry. Inthefirstcasetheloadwassealedtopreventdutyfreesales.Inthesecond case,thetraderwasfreetodowhateverhechosewithhisload.Ifthegoods were not subject to import duties, the trader usually chose the second option.Thisledtoagreatamount ofdisguised transittrade(17). C. Lackof product-differentiation SIUDshowsrelativelyfewproducts.Newitems(forexample,thegrowing exports of margarine in the nineteenth century) were listed separately onlyafteralongperiodoftime.Margarinewasforalongtimeclassifiedas butter.(18). D. Unreliable prices SIUD states most of its products infixed prices,based on the 1846 or 1871 unit-values(19).Thecurrentvaluesoftheseproductsaretherefore notknown.Someproductsareonlystated asvalues. E. Classification of products The SIUD classification isalphabetical and not byindustry of origin or destination. F. Quantities SIUDworkedpartlywithnon-metricquantitystandards,especiallyinthe period before 1872. G.Countryoforiginor destination SIUD classifies countries of origin ordestination asthoseof immediate
provenanceor delivery.Mostproducts aretherefore reported asoriginallyordestinedforBelgium,GermanyortheUK.Thisgivesanexaggeratedweightinforeign tradetothesecountries. SeveralauthorshaveworkedwithSIUDstatisticsinspiteoftheseproblems. Someoftheseproblemshavebeendealtwithbytheseauthors.Thesolutions totheseshortcomingswillbeanalysedinmoredetailinthefollowingsection. 2.3. OtherSourcesonDutch Trade Because Dutch trade statistics are of poor quality it seems obvious to try other sources.Wepointed earlier already to the possibility of comparing Dutchandforeign tradestatistics.Theproblemsinthisrespectare unfortunately greater than already mentioned, because these statistics distinguish otherproductsthanSIUD,useotherstandardsforquantities(especiallythe Britishtradestatistics(20)),whiletradeandtransportmarginsandexchange ratescanalsohindercomparison.Foreigntradestatisticsofother countries aretherefore not suitable for analysing trade developments in the Netherlands.IntheNetherlands,someother sourcesontradeexist.Thesesources dealonlywithcertain regions,productsorperiods (21).Theyare therefore not suitabletoconstruct long-termseries. When wewant to revalue SIUD with other prices, price sources must be available.Bos(22) revaluedhisestimations onexportsandimports mainly withforeignpriceseries,forexampleSpiethoff (23)andSauerbeck.Another possibility are various domestic prices on the same period, for example "Jaarcijfers" (24),inwhich prices on agricultural products are stated from 1877onwards,"Bijdragen vanhetStatistischInstituut"(25)and"Verslagen over denLandbouw inhetjaar ..."(26).A revaluation of agricultural productsinSIUDseemstherefore possible.Forindustrialproductshardlyany pricesareavailableandrevaluationoftheseproductsappearsthereforetobe quite difficult. Some other official publications on Dutch foreign trade are based on the samesourcesasSIUD,forexamplethe"MaandstatistiekvandenIn-,Uit-en Doorvoer"(MonthlyStatisticsonImports,ExportsandTransitTrade,(27)), whichispublishedfrom 1864onwards.BecausethesamedataasinS.I.U.D. areinvolvedhere,comparisonwiththissourceisoflittlerelevance.
III. TheMeasurement ofAgricultural Exports 3.1.BasicMaterialandClassification Intheprevioussectionwegaveanindicationoftheproblemswithrespectto the measurement of Dutch foreign trade statistics.This section examines somepossible solutionswithrespecttoDutchagriculturalexports. Thefirst shortcomingofSIUDwhichwenotedintheprevioussectionwere mistakesin the basic material.The extent of thisproblem has not become clearfrom previousstudiesandonemusthopethatithasnotbeentoolarge (28).Thereisnobasisatwhichestimatesofthesizeofthisproblemcanbe made. Aproblemwhichappearsistheappropriatedefinitionofanagriculturalproduct.Inwhatwayshouldthelinebedrawnbetweenagriculturalproductsand those made from agricultural raw materials. Wechose to follow the CBS procedurefortheperiod 1921-1939(29).Wethereforeclassifiedtheagricultural products into six groups, namely processed and unprocessed arable products,processedandunprocessedlivestockproductsandprocessedand unprocessed horticultural products. The CBS classification isbased on circumstances in a later period. In the periodonwhichtheCBSclassificationisbased,theNetherlandswasamajor exporter ofbeet-sugar.Inthenineteenth century however,the Netherlands exported refined cane-sugar derived from imported raw sugar. Therefore, sugarexportsintheearlierperiodcannotbeclassified asDutchagricultural output, exceptwhenthe sugarwasmadefrom indigeneous sugarbeetproduction.Thesameappliestostarchandgin,whichinthenineteenthcentury weremainlyproduced from imported rawmaterials. InourperiodtheNetherlandsstillexportedmadder,manureanddung.Inthe period onwhich the CBSclassification isbased, such exports had already ceased.Therefore, weaddedtheseproductstotheCBS classification. Another problemwhichariseswhenusingtheCBSclassification isthelow degreeofproductdifferentiation inSIUD.Itisnotalwayspossibletoclassify aproductunambigiously.Forexample,from 1875-1891tradeinmargarine isincluded with butter. Sinceweare only interested in trade in real butter
(margarineismainlyderivedfromimportedagriculturalproducts),wehadto makeourownestimateoftradeinbutter(30). Thislackofproduct-differentiation alsoposedaproblemforanalysisofhorticulture.Before 1905,freshanddriedfruitsandvegetablesarenotseparated inthestatistics.Therefore,wewereonlyabletocalculatequantity-indicesfor processed and unprocessed horticulture byincluding dried fruits andvegetablesinunprocessedhorticulture.Thiswillprobablynotgivegreat distortionsbecausedriedfruits andvegetablesarerelativelysmallexportproducts. Before 1865,rawandunprocessedflaxarenotseparatedinSIUD.Although onlyunprocessedflaxshouldbeincludedinourstatisticswecouldnotfinda wayto separate theseproducts.Therefore weincluded both in our calculations. Althoughfresh andevaporatedmilkwerenotseparatedbefore 1917,wesaw noneed todothis,becausehardlyanymilkwasexportedinthatperiod. Moredetailsonthisclassification andacompletelistoftheproductsweused inouranalysiscanbefound inAppendix A.l. 3.2. QuantityStandards Asmentioned before productsintheSIUDarestatedintermsofquantities andfixed prices.Someproductsareonlystatedintermsoftradedvalue.We recalculated quantitiestometricstandardsbyusingtheknownfixed prices. Before 1872mostquantitieswerestated inhectolitres,theirfixed pricewas thereforealsobasedonhectolitres.After 1872mostquantitieswerestatedin tons,therefore theirfixed pricewasalsobased ontons.Thefixed priceper unithoweverremainedthesame.Becauseofthisitwaspossibletocalculate exactlythequantitystandardsusedinSIUD.Bycomparingthesestandards withthoseinotherstudieswefound onlysmalldifferences, exceptfor potatoes.Alistofstandardscanbefound inappendixA.2. 3.3.DisguisedTransit Trade Frompreviousstudiesitappearsthatthisproblemcanbetracedto: a. Goods not produced in the Netherlands and which are nevertheless exportedaccordingtoSIUD,arepartofdisguisedtransittrade.Forthese goodsitispossibletocalculateimportbalancestoassessrealimports.This
isclearlythecasefor mineraloresandfortropicalproducts, b. Goods subject to import duties, were probably not imported and reexportedatalaterdate(31).Costsforthetraderwouldbetoohighinthis case.Especially consumption goods and refined goods were subject to import duties. Most disguised transit trade therefore consisted of bulk goods, raw materials and intermediate goods.Examples are grains and other unprocessed arable crops.When these aretraced, itispossible to calculate import-export balances, which can be used in place of gross tradedvalues. Unfortunately wecannotcomparedatafromSIUDwithtradestatisticsfrom other countries, because of the problems mentioned above. Comparison withthereportedimportsfromtheNetherlandsintheforeigntradestatistics ofBelgium,GermanyandtheUnitedKingdomcouldgivesomeindicationof theamount ofdisguised transittradeinSIUD. Intheagriculturalsectortheproblemofdisguisedtransittradeismostclear with processed and unprocessed arable crops. According to SIUD the Netherlandswasagreatexporterofgrainsinthenineteenthcentury.Insome yearsmorearableproductswereexportedthanproduced (32).Forsomeof these products export balances were calculated and SIUD values were replacedbythesebalances.Furtherdetailsandthelistofproductscorrected aregiveninappendixA.3. 3.4. CalculationofQuantityIndices ValuationsinDutchforeigntradestatisticswerebasedmainlyonfixedprices. Thesewereunitvaluesof 1846or 1871,dependingontheyearinwhichthe productfirstappearedbyquantityinthestatistics.Withthisinformation itis possible to calculate Laspeyres quantity indices. These tend to overstate growth,becauseuseofanearlybaseyeargivesalargeweighttonewproducts witharelativelyhighprice.Astheproduction ofthenewproductincreases, its price tends to fall (33).The Paasche quantity index uses current price weights.Ittherefore tendstounderstategrowth.TheFisher"ideal"indexis the geometric average of Laspeyres and Paasche indices and offsets the biasesofboth. Our basicindex,however,remainstheLaspeyres quantity index.The base year problem, as described above, can be mitigated when the periods for whichthesamepriceweightsareusedareshortened.Thebaseyearfor each
10
sub-period should as much as possible show prices representative for the sub-period. These sub-periods are linked at overlapping years.The whole procedureresultsinachainedLaspeyresindexfor theperiod asawholeat thepricelevelofareference year. Themainproblemnowishowtoselectthesesub-periods.Thefirstconstraint setbySIUDandthelater"AnnualStatisticsonImports,ExportsandTransit Trade"arethechangesinthestatisticswithrespect toproduct coverage.In 1872,in 1905andin 1917major expansionsoftheproductcoverageoccur. Therefore theperiods 1846- 1871,1872-1904, 1905-1916 and 1917-1926 werechosen beforehand. InstudiesbyGerschenkronandKrantz(34)itwassuggestedthattheperiodisationshould bebased mainly onphasesofgrowthandstagnation.In such periods, price conditions would tend to reflect similar movements. In the development ofDutch agricultural exports,thefollowing periods could be distinguished: 1. 1846-1875 Stronggrowthofexports. 2. 1875-1883Declineofexport performance. 3. 1883-1914Growingexports. 4. 1914-1926SeriousdeclineofexportperformanceduetoWorldWarIand recoveryafter theWar. Fortunately, this periodisation is not too different from that dictated by SIUD. In our analysis we therefore adopted the four periods mentioned above,although wehad to cut thethird period intwoparts,namely 18841905and1905-1913.1916isnotsuitableasanoverlappingyear,sowelinked theperiods 1905-1916 and 1917-1926 by calculating 1913-1926 based on theproductcoverageof1913and1913-1926basedontheproductcoverage of 1917-1926.These serieswerecombined bychainingboth seriesin 1913 andtakingthearithmeticalaverage. Asbaseyearsfor eachperiodwechose 1860,1880,1900,1910 and 1925. Theseyearsallappear tobequiterepresentativefor their sub-period.Both prices and quantities arenot exceptionalfor thesub-period asawhole.By takingthisperiodisation wecould baseour indexonalmost allagricultural productsincludedinSIUD. For the calculation of Laspeyres quantity indices by the procedures described above,weonlyhaveto derivepriceweightsfor thebaseyearsin
11
eachsub-period.ForthecalculationofPaascheandFisherquantityindices wehavetorevalueSIUDquantitieswithcurrentpricesfor moreyears.This approachisdependentontheexistenceofreliablepricesfortheperiodconsidered.Fortheagriculturalsector,priceswereavailable,althoughnotforall products."VerslagenoverdenLandbouwinhetjaar..."wasthemajorsource. Itsuppliespricesforthewholerelevantperiodfrom mostarablecrops,most livestockandbutterandcheese.Thesearemainlyaveragepricesofmarkets inthecentralpartoftheNetherlands.From 1869onwardsthispricesource contains average unit values for most arable crops and livestock products. For processed products our analysis is mainly based on other sources, namely"Jaarcijfers" and "Bijdragen vanhetStatistischInstituut".Prices for horticulturalproductswerealsoderivedfrom"Verslagen...".Anothersource of considerable importance to this studywas Spiethoff (35),who supplies Hamburgimport-prices fortheperiod 1847-1913,whichwerelinkedtothe availableDutchprices. Pricesareavailableforonlyafewprocessedagriculturalproductsandhorticultural products. For the missing prices we estimated proxies using a Paaschepriceindex,basedonallavailablepricesineachseparatesub-group. Thisindexwaslinkedtotheavailableunitvaluesforl925or whenthesewere notavailable,theunitvaluefor 1846or 1871.Bythisprocedurewewereable toconstruct pricesfor allgoodsfor thewhole period.For theperiod after 1916unitvalueexportpricesareavailablefrom thetradestatisticsitself. Implicitinthisapproachisthegeneralideathatpricesmovecloselytogether (36).Apriceindexbasedonsomegoodscanbeappliedforacertainperiod tocomparablegoodsalso.Inthecaseofagriculturalproductsthisapproach doesnot posegreat difficulties, becausenewproductswithdifferent pricemovementsrarelyoccur. For some goods SIUD gives only traded values, especially before 1872. Theseweredeflatedusingthepriceindicesdescribedabove,whichwerealso linkedtotheavailableunitvaluesof1871.Moredetailsonpricesandthecalculation ofquantityindicescanbefound inappendixA.5. FromvariousCBSstudies(37)serieswereavailablefortheperiodfrom 1921 onwards for most sub-groups and unprocessed agricultural exports as a whole.Thesewerechained totheserieswecalculated.Theaverageratioof theyears 1925and 1926wastakentolinktheseries.Theyears 1921-1924 werebased ontheserieswecalculated ourselves.
12
3.5. MethodologicalAppraisal The methods described above have some major advantages over previous studies.Dutchtradestatisticssuffer fromseriousproblems.Ourmethodcan fairlywellsolvemostoftheseproblems.Thecorrectionfor disguised transit traderemainsarbitrary,butthebalancemethodweusedisprobablythebest. Alsoourstudyistheonlyoneasfarasweknow,whichtriestoderivequantity indicesfor disaggregated groupsfor thewholeperiodfrom thesecorrected figures. Other studies do not provide indices or evenwork withuncorrected trade figures (38).Use ofuncorrected tradefigures makescomparison withlater periods quitedifficult and overestimates thelevelof agricultural exportsin thenineteenthandearlytwentiethcentury.Areliableanalysisofgrowthcan alsonotbeexpected whenuncorrected figures areused.Somestudiesonly showtradebalances(39).Thisimpliesnoexporttimeseriesinitselfareestablishedandageneralviewonthedevelopmentoftheagriculturalsectorisnot possible.Estimationofdisguisedtransittradebymeansofpercent-wisecorrections is even more arbitrary. Disguised transit trade was most likely affected bychangesinimport-duties andother circumstances anditshould therefore beexpectedthatitwasnoastableproportionovertime. Ourestimatesincludeallrelevantproducts.Weshowseparateseriesfor the varioussub-groups,whichhastheadvantagethatamoredetailedanalysisof agriculturalsub-sectors andananalysisofindustrialisation inthefood-processingindustriesispossible. Our method could stillbeimproved alittlefurther. Thepricesweused are domesticprices,whichespeciallyfortheearlyyears,aresomewhatarbitrary. Acomparisonwithforeign pricesourcesorperhapsforeign tradestatistics wouldbeuseful aswell. Afurther possibility would beto comparetradefigures for individualproductswithproduction.Thismightalsobeuseful for further analysisofdisguisedtransittrade.Thiswouldalsomaketheroleofexportsinagricultural developmentbebetterunderstood,buttheaggregatevalueofproductionwe usedinthisstudyisnot sufficiently comparabletoexportstoallowfor such analysis. Reliable price and volume time series, both for production and exports,arenecessaryfor afurther analysisofDutchagricultureinthenineteenth andfirst partofthetwentiethcentury.
13
IVAgriculturalExport Performance 4.1. Growthofagriculturalproduction1846-1926 This section analyses agricultural growth during the nineteenth and early twentiethcentury.Thefirstpartdiscussesagriculturalproduction,wherethe analysisismainlybasedonproductionofarablecropsandlivestock,because littleinformation onhorticulture isavailablefor thisperiod.Theanalysisis mainly descriptive, because no long term series for production have been derivedasyet(40).Thesecondpartofthissectiongivesadetailedanalyisof export performance invarious agricultural subsectors.Inthethird partwe return to agricultural production from the viewpoint of some quantitative studies. Most studies of Dutch agriculture divide the country into its coastal and inland regions.Productioninthecoastalregionconsistsmainlyoflivestock production whilethe inland region produces relatively more arable crops. Theperiod considered herecan,accordingtoVanZanden (41),bedivided intothreesub-periods,namely 1810-1850,1850-1880and 1880-1914.The periodafter 1914isnotconsideredinhisstudy.Thisperiodisheavilyaffected bytheFirstWorldWarand itsaftermath. Weareheremainlyinterested in earlierphases. Thefirstperiod, 1810-1850ischaracterizedbyVanZanden,asoneofstrong growthintheinlandprovinces.VanZandenexplainsthegrowthofagriculturalproductionintheinlandprovincesmainlybyincreasedlabourinput(42). Majorcropswere:potatoes,turnipsandrye,whilesheep-breedingwasalsoa majoractivity.Thecoastalregions,mainlyproducinglivestockproducts,sufferedfromdecliningpercapitaagriculturalconsumptionandastagnationin urbanisation.Therefore lesslivestockproductscouldbesoldtothecities. Thesecondperiod 1850-1880wasoneofgrowthforallregions,mainlydue to risingagricultural exports,and from 1865 onwards also dueto growing domestic consumption. Van Zanden (43) refers to thisperiod as a growth phase in which specialisation replaces the growth of production by more labour input. The favourable conditions on the world market, due to improved meansof transportation, strongeconomic growthinmost Europeancountriesandadeclineinprotectionism,offer scopeforDutchfarmers tospecializeinlivestockproductsandotherproductswithhighincomeelas-
14
ticity.Inthisperiodpricesofmostagriculturalproductsrisestrongly.Sneller (44) alsoconsiders the period 1850-1880 asaveryprosperous period for Dutch farmers. Thethirdperiod, 1880-1914 startswithastrongpricefall.Theyears 18801900 are often referred to as the agricultural crisis. From 1877 onwards growinggrainexportsfromtheUnitedStates,RussiaandArgentine,causea greatfall in prices (45).The fall (46)wasespecially apparent for food and fodder crops,likewheat,rye,barleyandoats.Forsomearablecropsthefall evenended production intheNetherlands.Forlivestockproduction prices alsofell,butthefallwassmallerinthiscase.Horticulturewasonlytemporarilyaffected bythepricefall.Thefallalsoresultedinverycheapfodder prices forproducersoflivestock.Thismayhavebeenareasonforthestronggrowth oflivestockproduction.Theagriculturalcrisisforced Dutchfarmerstospecializefurther andischaracterizedbyVanZandenasthe"FirstGreenRevolution"(47).Tracy(48)alsomentions theresponseofDutchagricultureto theagricultural crisis.Most European countries responded with enhanced protection.OnlyDenmark,theUKandtheNetherlandsrespondedbymodernisationandspecialisation oftheiragricultural sector. 4.2. Growthofexports1846-1926 Figure 1 identifies four growthphases: 1. 1846-1875lnthisperiod exportperformance improved.Wealreadymentionedsomeofthecausessuchasthedeclineofprotectionandimproved transportation.ThestronggrowthofdemandinmostEuropeancountries wasalsoimportant.From 1846onwardstheEnglishmarketwasopened forproductsfromabroadandthiswasthebeginningofadeclineinprotectioninmostcountries(49). VanZanden'sopiniononthisperiod(50)isalsothatadecliningconsumptionofagriculturalproductsintheNetherlands,openedmorepossibilities foragriculturalexports.Thiscannotbecheckedfromourdata.After 1865 export performance becameunstable.In 1866andlaterin 1873depressions hit exports.The depression of 1866 was mainly caused by cattle plagues and bad weather, that of 1873 is mainly apparent in livestock exports. 2. 1875-1883Therewasaclearfallinagriculturalexportsinthisperiod.Inthe late 1870s,an agricultural crisis struck Europe.Somebad harvest years resultedinastagnatingproduction.Atthesametime,exceptionallygood harvests were made in North America. From the 1850s onwards, grain
15
exportsfromNorthAmerica(aswellasRussiaandArgentine)hadgrown steadily.In these countries new territories had opened up,where cheap production was enabled. The improved means of transportation from theseterritories totheEuropean market, resulted inagrowingcompetitionfromthesecountries.Wheninthelate1870ssomeEuropeanharvests were failures, exports from North America and Russia filled the gap. Exports from European countries themselves therefore faltered. In the Netherlands,someproductsalsowitnessedastronglossofcompetitivity, because its quality decreased rapidly relative to its competitors. From 1883onwards theimpact of thiscrisiswas overcomeand exports flourishedagain. Figure1 VolumeofTotalAgriculturalExports (Laspeyresquantityindex,1860= 100) 550 -, 500 -
I i
!
450 -
) 400 -
i i i
/
f
350 -
rf*^)
300 -
1 â
\\ 1f i
1
250 -
'i' ; i1 /é
i 200 -
p j ^
0 J> 150 -
Â
100 -
50 J
i
II
%s^i
P\
i! ii
^ 0 Efef
*£* 1856
1866
1876
1886
1896
1906
1916
Source: TableB.2.
3. 1883-1914Thisperiodwasagainoneofstrongexportgrowth.Inresponse totheagriculturalcrisis,theNetherlandsconcentrated onprocessed and horticulturalproductsandarablecropslikepotatoes,sugarbeetsandflax. Exportsofunprocessedproductsstagnated.Increasingpercapitaincome
16
andanincreasingurbanisationinsurroundingcountriesalsooffered more scopefor exportsofprocessed andhorticulturalproducts. 4. 1914-1926IntheearlyyearsofWorldWarIexportsremained quitehigh, becausethecountriesatwarimported largeamountsofagriculturalproducts. This is particularly evident for processed and horticultural products.Thelateryearsofthewarsawaseriousdeclineofexports.After the war,exportsroserapidlyandexceeded pre-warlevels.
Table2 GrowthofAgriculturalExports (annualaveragecompound growthrate,in%) Period
Arable Crops
Unprocessed Livestock Horticulture
Processed Arable Livestock Horticultural Products Products Products
1. 1846-1875 (1846-1865) (1865-1875)
5,73 9,97 -1,88
5,00 7,22 0,91
6,44 6,80 5,74
5,23 6,10 3,61
2,81 3,42 1,65
2,84 5,10 -1,33
2. 1875-1883
-6,64
-3,28
4,80
5,13
-3,15
-10,53
3. 1883-1914 (1883-1905) (1905-1914)
3,84 3,80 3,95
0,54 -0,79 3,86
6,81 6,67 7,16
3,47 3,71 2,89
4,59 4,57 4,64
9,62 9,18 10,68
4. 1914-1926 (1914-1918) (1918-1926)
2,55 -44,19 39,00
-1,48 -44,88 31,72
1,84 -17,31 13,01
-0,87 -41,45 28,98
1,71 -47,62 41,74
4,59 55,01 -14,09
1846-1926
3,22
1,43
5,71
3,60
2,71
4,22
1921-1939 1946-1950 1950-1957 1950-1984
-1,06 6,29 3,17 n.a.
6,70 131,32 14,70 n.a.
2,24 23,77 7,23 n.a.
-2,99 86,73 n.a. n.a.
2,70 162,23 n.a. n.a.
3,82 68,18 n.a. n.a.
Period
1846-1875 (1846-1865) (1865-1875) 2. 1875-1883
AllArable All All All Crops& Livestock Horticulture Unprocess. Products &Products &Products
All All Processed Agricultural Products
5,44 8,19 0,41
3,75 5,09 1,25
5,99 6,53 4,98
5,29 8,00 0,31
3,38 4,05 2,11
4,23 5,89 1,14
-0,61
-3,22
4,12
-3,42
-0,97
-2,34
17
3. 1883-1914 (1883-1905) (1905-1914)
3,57 3,64 3,41
3,24 2,74 4,47
6,93 6,74 7,39
2,63 1,77 4,77
4,33 4,30 4,41
3,61 3,24 4,53
4. 1914-1926 (1914-1918) (1918-1926)
0,94 -42,77 34,07
1,12 -47,02 39,70
2,14 -2,94 4,79
0,91 -31,21 22,22
1,38 -35,35 26,96
1,21 33,70 25,06
1846-1926
3,42
2,44
5,58
2,70
3,00
2,86
1921-1939 1946-1950 1950-1957 1950-1984
n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
2,18 26,56 8,80 5,87
n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
Source:Derivedfrom tablesB.l andB.2.
Table 2 shows annual compound growth ratesfor thevarious sub-sectors. They help to clarify our previous analysis.They also demonstrate whywe chose for the former mentioned periodisation. 1846-1875 was clearly a growthphaseforallsectors.1875-1883showsstagnationordeclineinmost sectors,exceptforprocessedarablecrops.Theperiod1883-1914wasclearly oneofrapidgrowth.Wethinktherefore ourperiodisation isjustified. Afurther illustrationofourearlieranalysiscanbefound intable3.Wehere showtheshareofalsubsectorsintotalexports. The share of horticulture rises strongly from about 2%of total exports in 1846to 17%in 1926.Unprocessed products riseinourfirst growth phase although we can identify the decline in the years 1865-1866. From 1875 onwardstheshareofexportsofunprocessedproductsisdeclining.Theshare ofunprocessed products risesfrom 42%in 1846toapeakin 1865of59% (andagain 59%in 1871)andthendeclinesto36%in 1926.Processed productsdeclinefrom 54%in1846to41%in1865andthenriseagainto64%in 1926.Wecanthereforeseeasubstitutionfromunprocessedproductstoprocessedproductsandhorticulturalproductstakingplaceintheperiod18711926.The share of arable crops and products remainsfairly constant over timebetween20and30%oftotalexports,livestockand-productsarebyfar the largest sector, although its share declines somewhat due to the rapid expansionofhorticulture.
18
Table3 ShareofSubsectors inTotalAgricultural Exports (benchmarkyears,atcurrentprices,in%) Unprocessed Products
1846 1850 1855 1860 1865 1870 1875 1880 1885 1890 1895 1900 1905 1910 1913 1918 1920 1926
Processed Products
Arable Crops
Livestock
Horticulture
Arable Crops
Livestock
Horticulture
10,5 14,3 11,0 8,5 17,2 16,9 13,8 9,9 10,2 10,4 13,4 10,7 10,0 8,4 8,0 7,3 20,3 10,9
30,1 30,1 33,8 31,3 40,1 32,1 42,1 37,7 33,0 33,9 17,6 11,1 16,0 15,5 14,9 9,3 5,6 9,3
1,8 2,0 2,3 3,3 2,0 2,8 3,3 4,6 6,6 7,0 9,6 9,2 7,9 8,6 9,1 26,2 10,7 15,7
12,7 11,0 11,2 12,4 8,4 8,1 9,5 13,5 11,4 12,3 11,2 11,7 12,2 13,2 10,1 3,8 13,1 7,3
44,6 42,1 41,4 44,3 32,0 39,7 31,2 34,2 38,6 36,2 48,0 56,9 53,1 53,2 57,2 18,9 46,7 55,4
0,3 0,4 0,4 0,2 0,3 0,3 0,2 0,1 0,2 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,7 1,0 0,8 34,6 3,6 1,5
Source: TableB.4.
After havingidentified themajor growthphaseswewillanalysethevarious sub-groupsinfurther detail. A.Unprocessedproducts: Forunprocessed arablecrops,thedeclineofexportsstarted somewhat earlierthanfor agriculturalexportsasawhole.From 1870onwardsexportsof this sub-group decline.In 1866 astrongdepression canbeseeninfigure 2. The main growth-phase for thisgroup is 1883-1914.The trend during the FirstWorldWarandtheperioduntil1926showsthesamepatternasfortotal agriculture.Theimportantproductsresponsibleforgrowthinthissectorare: potatoes,sugarbeetsandflax. The development of livestock exports is in some respects comparable. Growth isunstable inthis sector (figure 3).The main growth inthis sector takes place in the period 1846-1875.In 1871 exports reach a maximum. Afterwards periodsofdeclineandgrowtharevisible.Thegreatunstabilityis partlycausedbyplagueswhichaffected cattleinseveralEuropeancountries
19
Figure2 VolumeofExportsofUnprocessedArableCrops (Laspeyresquantityindex, 1913= 100) 260 240 -
ti i
220 -
il
200 -
l
/*v
V À '
180 -
^
140 -
Ici
!T}
? Çl
i
1
[*)
ci
«^ â W\|^1
100 80 -
_ t i$\m
60 -
ii M I.i i
40 20 -
i'
/Ï
120 -
\\é
01!
t
Pî
160 -
tpcP
R
1
\
I 1
, - • * " '
\
fi \ *
30-
*"•T w '
/-*v ~-ä
1
ƒ•'-•
i i
2010i
0-
1846 Butter
1856
1866
1876 Cheese Source:
1886 o
1896
1906
1916
1926
Butter (Corrected)
SIUD
33
AppendixA.2.RecalculationofQuantityStandards Thisappendix showstheadjustment ofSIUDtoametricbasis.Weusedthe fixed pricesinSIUDtocalculatethestandardsastheyareusedinSIUD.An example may be useful in this respect; oats costs fllO,- per 30 hectolitres before 1872 and f80,- per metric ton after 1872. Because fixed prices remainedthesameinSIUDwecancalculatetheexactvalueofonehectolitre inSIUD:((110/30)/80)*1000= 45.8kilograms.Whencomparingthestandardscalculatedinthiswaywefound onlysmalldiversionsofstandardssupplied by other sources (for example: "Jaarcijfers Landbouw Economisch Instituut",1966).Theonlyexceptioninthisrespectwasthestandardforpotatoeswhichdifferedtoomuchwhencalculatedbythisapproach.Inthiscasewe took thestandard supplied bytheearliermentioned "Jaarcijfers LEI".This proceduregaveusthefollowing standards: potatoes oats buckwheat beans peas mixedgrains canary-seed clover-seed musterd-seed "krok"-and "deder"-seed hemp-seed cole-and rape-seed lin-seed
hectolitre = 70.0kilograms hectolitre = :45.8kilograms hectolitre = :66.7kilograms hectolitre 78.4kilograms hectolitre = 83.3kilograms hectolitre = 70.2kilograms hectolitre = 71.4kilograms hectolitre = 83.3kilograms hectolitre = :66.7kilograms hectolitre = :62.5 kilograms hectolitre = 54.5kilograms hectolitre = 73.6 kilograms hectolitre = 69.4kilograms
Some other standards also had to be recalculated, although they are not uncommon intrade statistics.These standards howeverdid not remain the sameoverthewholeperiod.Usingthesamemethodwecalculated: bees eggs
34
1hive= 20kilograms 1000pieces= 22kilograms
AppendixA.3.CorrectionforDisguisedTransitTrade Export-balanceswerecalculatedforsomeunprocessedandprocessedarable crops. Disguised transit trade is illustrated in figure A.3.I.. In this graph exports and imports of oats appear highly correlated, especially over the period 1880-1916.When considering trade in agricultural products, such correlation ishiglyunlikely.An agricultural productisingeneral exported, whenthereisasurplusofproductionoverdomesticconsumptionorwhenthe productismainlyproducedfortheworldmarket.Contrarily,anagricultural productisimportedingeneralwhendomesticproductionistoolowtomeet domesticdemandorwhentheproductisnotproducedinthecountryitself.A highlevelofexportsandimportsinthesameyearforoneproductistherefore unlikely.Thissituationisreferred toasdisguisedtransittrade. FigureA.3.1 Tradeinoats, 1846-1916 (inthousand tons) 800
500 co-o OI
M £!
400
300
100 ^^^%p^: 0-c^aHTaoaaBCCQQüGESB^1846
1856
1866
-i-^€ J
1876
1886
1896
1906
Imports
Exports
Source: SIUD
35
Wetherefore calculated trade-balancesfor thefollowing products: •wheat •rye •buckwheat •peas •grass-seed •cole-,rape- and other oil-seeds
barley oats beans hemp (unhackled) lin-seed rye-flour
Forunprocessed arablecrops,thisprocedureshowsthatafter correctionfor disguisedtransittrademostproductsdisappear completely,becauseingeneral importsexceed exports.Unavoidably bytakingbalanceswealsoerase somerealexportsfrom ourcalculations.
36
AppendixA.4.ProductsIncluded inOur Quantity-Index Group 1: UnprocessedArable Crops 1. 1846-1871: potatoes, sugar-beets, chicory (processed and unprocessed), wheat, rye, barley, oats, buckwheat, beans, peas, millet, mixed grains, untreshed grains, hay, hemp (hackled and unhackled), flax (raw and unprocessed), straw, canary-seed, clover- seed, mustard-seed, hempseed,cole-andrape-seed,lin-seed,flower-seed. 2. 1872-1904: as 1846-1871,and also vegetable fibres, grass-seed, "krok"seed, "deder"-seed. 3. 1905-1916.as 1872-1904,andalsobeet-seed,tree-seed,otheroil-seeds. 4. 1917-1926.allproductsasnamed inCBS-list(1). Group2:UnprocessedLivestockProducts 1. 1846-1871: bees, eggs,honey, dung and manure, horses (various), cattle (various),pigs,sheep,lambs,wax(notbleached),wool(unprocessed). 2. 1872-1904:as 1846-1871,andalsogoats,donkeys. 3. 1905-1916.as 1871-1904,andalsofresh milk. 4. 1917-1926. allproductsinCBS-list. Group3:UnprocessedHorticulturalProducts 1. 1846-1871: trees and plants,fresh and dried vegetables,fresh and dried fruits. 2. 1872-1904:as 1846-1871 3. 1905-1916.treesandplants,fresh vegetables,fresh fruits. 4. 1917-1926allproductsinCBS-list. Group4:ProcessedArable Crops 1. 1846-1871:potato-flour, sugarbeet pulp,bread andrusk,beer,bran,brokengrains,wasteofbuckwheat,yeast,cakes,vermicelli,wheat-flour, ryeflour, buckwheat-flour, other flour, madder (raw and unprocessed), beetsugar. 2. 1872-1904: as 1846-1871,and also biscuits, other waste of grains,malt, macaroni,semolina. 3. 1905-1916.as 1872-1904 4. 1917-1926allproductsinCBS-list.
37
Group5:ProcessedLivestockProducts 1.1846-1871: offal (various), butter, cheese, animal hair, hides, feathers, meat (various),game. 2. 1872-1904: as 1846-1871 3. 1905-1916. as 1846-1871. 4. 1917-1926.allproductsinCBS-list. Group6:ProcessedHorticulturalProducts 1. 1846-1871: otherwise processed vegetables, otherwise processed fruits, fruitjuice. 2. 1872-1904:as 1846-1871. 3. 1905-1916. vegetables (dried, otherwise processed), fruits (dried, otherwiseprocessed). 4. 1917-1926.allproductsinCBS-list. (1)Thisisthe basiclistfor the CBS-study on Dutch tradefrom1921- 1939, CBS, "Hoeveelheids- enprijs (unit-value) indexcijfers van de buitenlandsehandel voor deperiode 19211939", StatistischeenEconometrischeOnderzoekingen, 2ekwartaal1951,pp. 112-120
38
AppendixA.5.:Prices andPrice Indices Inthisappendixwewillclarify indetailthemethodologyweusedtorevalue SIUD-quantities with current prices.These prices were derived from various sources and not all sub-groups could be covered to the same extent. The following prices could be derived (products between brackets were linkedtotheformer product): 1. Unprocessed arable crops:potatoes, sugarbeets, unprocessed chichory (processed), wheat (1917-1926), rye (1917-1926), barley (19171926),oats,buckwheat,beans,peas,unhackled hemp(hackled),rawflax (unprocessed), straw, canary-seed, mustard-seed, hemp-seed, cole-/ rape-seed,other oil-seeds,lin-seed. 2. Unprocessed livestock: bees, eggs, horses (various other specified horses),foles,cows(otherbovine),calves,pigs,sheep,lambs,wool. 3. Unprocessed horticulture:apples,pears,cabbage, cauliflower. 4. Processedarablecrops:breadandrusk,wheat-flour,rye-flour, beetsugar, raw madder (unprocessed), potato-starch (from 1900 onwards), bran (from 1914onwards),yeast(from 1909onwards). 5. Processed livestockproducts:butter, cheese,hides (various other),beef, veal,mutton,pork. 6. Processed horticultural products:No separate prices were available for thisgroup,priceswerelinked totheprices of unprocessed horticultural products. With thesepriceswecalculated Paasche price-indices,whichwelinked to the available unit-value prices for 1925 to construct prices for goods for whichnopricefrom asecondarysourcewasavailable.Insomecaseswehad tolinktotheunit-valuesfrom earlieryears,becausenounit-valuefor 1925 was available. For horticultural products very few prices were available, hereweusedthreeseparateprice-indices.Thefirstprice-indexweusedwas derived from the prices for apples and pears and applied to all fruits and fruit-products.Thesecondprice-indexwasbasedonthepricesfor cabbage and cauliflower and applied to allvegetablesandproducts madefrom vegetables. A third price-index was based on the Paasche index for unprocessed arable crops and was applied to bulbs, trees and plants. This procedureisofcoursequitearbitrarybecausewealsohadtousetheseartificial prices for the calculation of quantities from the known traded values. Thescarceinformation availableonhorticulturalpriceslimitsthepossibiltieshowever.
39
Especially for horticulture the calculated price-indices are therefore quite arbitrary.Fortheothersub-groupsourprice-information dealswithalmost all major products and the constructed price-index will be quite reliable therefore.Becauseweexcludedwheat,rye,barleyand oats(although some real exports of this latter product remain) from our calculations, no great price-fall is apparent in our calculations for unprocessed arable crops.In processed arablecrops(especiallyfor wheat-flour) thisprice-fall isgreater. Intherestofthisappendixtheprice-indicesfor allsub-groupswillbegiven (noseparateprice-indicesforunprocessed andprocessedhorticulturewere derived) and for total agriculture.The tables on which these price-indices arebasedcanbefound inappendixtableB.7,whilethebasic price-informationissupplied intableC.2. FigureA.5.1 PriceIndexUnprocessedArableCrops (PaascheIndex, 1860= 100) 170 IA
160 -
ii
150 -
i
140 -
1
1 1i 1 i
130 -
fi é\
120 -
100 -
if
/i 90 -
..
S
(5y
r
i
%9
M ft,
n\
80 70 60 1846
1856
1866
1876
1886
Source: TableB.7.
40
1 '-\
i\ t
f, I
ft
5ft, J
sff
1l M
1
A
I;
110 -
i i\
w /\
f%
y
i1#M
1896
1906
1916
1926
FigureA.5.2 PriceIndexUnprocessed Livestock (PaascheIndex, I860= 100) !
190 180 170 -
if \
160 -
*)
150 -
Ç
140 -
j
fo
t:
r
0
k 1l\3
i
in
IT
a
CE« P 6) /
if
to
80 -
I
i
& \
1
90 -
I
1 J1
!
120 -
100 -
M
i
1/1 t^,l
130 -
110 -
iy
IP i 1 1
\?
70 60 1846 I
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,,
i
1856
1866
,, 1876
1886
1896
1906
1916
1926
Source: TableB.7.
FigureA.5.3 PriceIndexProcessedArableProducts (PaascheIndex, 1860= 100) 120 110 100 90 g ai
I il Is i l*i i
80
V hi"
ip \
70
a*\ .
ri
fca35 60 50
'A
40
y s
fö5 j{ Kj y> }(
«ni
30 20 1846
1856
1866
1876
1886
1896
1906
1916
1926
Source: TableB.7.
41
FigureA.5.4 PriceIndexProcessedLivestockProducts (Paascheindex, 1860= 100) i ; *
240 230 220 -
i i i
[
200 -
!f\
i i
190 -
fp ,
i i
180 170 H 160 -
