Food market liberalization: History and prospects

Abstract

Government intervention has been a feature of food markets in both industrialized and agrarian economies. However, the last 10 years have seen reforms aimed at reducing intervention; these have been a characteristic of ‘structural adjustment’. The process of reform has involved the replacement of administered by market‐determined prices and the abolition of trading parastatals or the removal of their monopoly. Despite an almost complete consensus that reforms are necessary and the absence of coherent local opposition, the pace and extent of reforms have varied. Moreover, views about liberalization tend to be polarized. Proponents argue that continued intervention is inefficient, unaffordable and distorting; antagonists suggest that unmodified markets lead to unacceptable inequalities, and expose producers and consumers to unacceptable risks. Moreover, weak fragmented markets do not constitute a sufficient base for sustained growth. This paper reviews the experience. It concludes that simple solutions of substituting public with private trading are not necessarily possible nor desirable, and argues that the nature of the debate may be misleading. The way forward may not lie in a choice between private market supremacy and conventional government intervention.