Wednesday, January 23, 2008

The Politics of Soybean (6)

Thanks to Ari Perdana and Arya Gaduh, we noted that the share of soybean in household consumption is less than 2 percent. It's true that soybean has strong links to other commodities. But this fact (the 2 percent role) should be taken as an indicator for not to exaggerate the problem (I too might have sounded otherwise). Arya Gaduh and Dede Basri are right, subsidy, if given, should be addressed in the form of food subsidy, not particular commodity (e.g. soybean commodity -- see my discussion with Arya, and also Dede's in Diskusi Ekonomi).

2 comments:

Ical said...

Pak Aco, let say that I belief your colleagues presumption about the proportion of soybeans in household consumption. But my eye sight judgment couldn't accept that. In many restaurants and families, I see that no matter the menu is, Tempe is always served as complementary food. I think the main reason why soybeans constitute only less than 2 percents in the total household consumption is because prior to this hiking in price, households were experiencing a relatively cheap price in term of soybeans. so with regards to the price, the less percentage points is making sense.

a.p. said...

Ical -- the number was from SUSENAS 2007 (not our presumption).

I can't tell if your eyesight judgment is valid. But you were right about one thing: the number was soybean products expenditure as a share of HH total expenditure. If we are talking about the welfare effect, then it's the expenditure (P x Q) that matters, rather than just the Q.

Unless, as Aco said, we are discussing the nutritional effects.