CHAPTER 16

EXPORT AND IMPORT

World Trade
The global economy is projected to recover from 0.6 growth recorded in 2009 to 4.8 percent growth in 2010. ccording to !"#$ in advanced economies$ growth is e%pected to halve from &.'0 percent in the first half of the year to 1.(' percent in the second half. )merging and developing economies too are e%pected to witness a moderation in the pace of growth from 8 percent in the first half to 6.2' percent in the second half. The temporary slow down is also believed to e%tend *p to the first half of 2011. The global recovery lost moment*m in the second +*arters of the year$ with the pace of recovery starting to slow down significantly in the advanced co*ntries partic*larly in the ,and .apan. Box . 16.1 fter the sharpest decline in more than (0 years$ world trade is set to rebo*nd in 2010 by growing at 9.'7$ according to /T2 economists. 8/T2 r*les and principles have assisted governments in 0eeping mar0ets open and they now provide a platform from which trade can grow as the global economy improves. /e see the light at the end of the t*nnel and trade promises to be an important part of the recovery. 5*t we m*st avoid derailing any economic revival thro*gh protectionism$
WTO Report

16.2 /ith scope for fiscal stim*l*s already stretched to the point when sovereign ris0 concerns co*ld be detrimental to recovery in growth$ several central ban0s of advanced economies have signaled possible *se of additional accommodative monitoring policy. Trade activities have recovered strongly and the moment*m has also been s*stained. 1eflecting this /T2 revised an *pward growth in the merchandise trade vol*me to 1&.' percent for 2010 from the previo*s estimates of 10 percent made earlier$ which will be the fastest ever year on year e%pansion in trade so far. The high trade vol*me is primarily driven by rob*st growth records in the first half of 2010 and also d*e to the low base that res*lted from sharp 12.2 percent contraction e%perienced in 2009. Tho*gh the val*e of merchandise trade e%panded by 2' percent in the first half 2010$ the level of activity still remains below the pre3crisis level. /ith deficient domestic demand$ there have been sign of resorting to protectionism and *nder val*ed e%change rates in some co*ntries$ which wo*ld hinder over all global recovery. /orld merchandise trade by region and selected co*ntry$ 2009 is given in ppendi% 16.1. 16.& ccording to the assessment made by 45 4eveloping sia has s*stained the moment*m after witnessing a rob*st recovery and is e%pected to grow 8.2 percent in 2010 as against '.4 percent in 2009. 1ecovery both in domestic demand and e%ports has contrib*ted s*ch performance. The 6lobal #inancial -tability 1eport 2ctober 2010 notes that higher growth prospects and so*nder f*ndamentals in )merging "ar0et )conomies point to a str*ct*ral asset re allocation from advanced economies which may increase violability in port folio capital flows and stream local mar0et

112

val*ations in emerging mar0et economies. 9ow a days the )"):s have provided m*ch needed stim*l*s to the global economy. Indias orei!n Trade 16.4 !ndian )conomy has been s*bjected to greater infl*ence of global b*siness cycles. This is reflected in the high degree of co3movement between the !ndian b*siness cycle with the global b*siness cycles. /ith rising e%ports along with a transition from primary article e%ports to man*fact*ring e%ports$ the co3movement between !ndia:s e%ports and world imports has increased significantly in recent years. lso there has been strong cas*al effect from the global stoc0 prices to domestic stoc0 prices with the ,- stoc0 prices having significant cas*al import on the !ndian stoc0 prices. This shift in !ndian trade and b*siness cycle with the global cycles and increased financial integration in the recent period s*ggest that !ndia cannot remains imm*ne to global trends. Th*s$ the global economic development now have a greater infl*ence on the domestic economy as was evident d*ring the recent global financial and economic crisis. The e%port imports and trade balance of !ndia from 1990391 to 2009310 is given in ppendi% 16.2. 16.' The 6lobal ;i+*idity <risis had adversely affected global demand in 2008 and 2009. s a res*lt$ !ndia:s e%port contracted between 2ctober 2008 and -eptember 2009. !t recovered in 2ctober 2009$ posting a marginal rise of 0.& percent and accelerated in the month that followed. =!ndia:s e%ports grew by 1&.2 percent in .*ly 2010 to ,-> 16.2 billion$ m*ch lower than the growth recorded in the first three months of the fiscal 2010311. The slow down in growth may be e%pected to contin*e for the rest of the fiscal as the developed co*ntries were e%pected to go for fiscal consolidation by partially rolling bac0 the economic stim*l*s pac0ages. 4*e to the low base effect !ndia:s e%ports showed rob*st growth &&.& percent$ 41.& percent and &6.8 percent respectively from pril to .*ne. 16.6 )%port d*ring -eptember 2010 at ,-> 18.0 billion recorded a growth of 2&.2 percent as against a decline of (.4 percent registered in -eptember 2009. mar0able point is that the declining phase of !ndia:s e%port in the after math of global financial crisis ended with -eptember 2009. s a res*lt$ the low base effect wo*ld be ebbed o*t in the growth of e%ports from 2ctober 2010. )%ports d*ring the first half of 2010311 stood at ,-> 110&.6 billion$ registering an increase of 28.0 percent as against a decline of 2'.( percent d*ring the corresponding period of 2009310. 16.( !ndia:s merchandise imports d*ring -eptember 2010 at ,-> 2(.1 billion showed a growth of 26.1 percent as against a decline of &0.9 percent registered in -eptember 2009. 4*ring pril3 -eptember 2010$ imports at ,-> 166.' billion registered a growth of 29.9 percent$ partly reflecting the base effect as it was &0.( percent decline in the previo*s year. 4estination wise e%port of all commodities from !ndia is given in ppendi% 16.&. !tem3wise details of !ndia:s #oreign Trade pril3 -eptember 2010 in ,-> is shown below in Table 16.1. Ta"le 16.1 Indias Mer#$andise Trade A%ril&'e%(e)"er *+1+ ,-'. "illion/
I(e) 1 )%ports 2il e%ports 9on oil e%ports !mports 2il imports 9on oil imports Trade 5alance 2il Trade 5alance 9on 2il trade 5alance *++0&1+ ,R/ * 81.0=32'.(? 10.8=342.'? (0.2=322.2? 128.1=3&0.(? &(.'=340.8? 90.(=32'.'? 34(.2 326.( 320.' *+1+&*+11 ,P/ 1 10&.6 =28.0? 3 3 166.'=29.9? 48.(=&0.0? 11(.8=29.9? 362.8 3 3

Economic Review 2010

113
Note: Revised, (P) Provisional (-) Not available figure in parentheses shows per entage hange over the orresponding period the previous !ear" #our e: R$% $ulletin &e e'ber ()*)"

16.8 s a conse+*ence to the increase in cr*de oil prices petrole*m$ oil and l*bricants imports at ,-> 48.( billion d*ring pril3-eptember 2010 showed a growth of &0 percent$ as against a decline of 40.8 percent a year ago. 9on3@2; imports d*ring pril3-eptember 2010 at ,-> 11(.8 billion recorded a growth of 29.9 percent as against a decline of 2'.' percent in pril3-eptember 2009. 16.9 Trade deficit d*ring pril3-eptember 2010 amo*nted to ,-> 62.8 billion which was higher by ,-> 1'.6 billion =&&.2 percent? than ,-> 4(.2 billion in the corresponding period of 2009 d*e to relatively larger increase in imports than e%ports. The disaggregated data on commodity wise merchandise trade as well as direction of trade pointed o*t that trade of almost all major commodity gro*ps and with major trading partners registered a rise d*ring the first +*arter of 2010311 when compared with the corresponding period of preceding year. 16.10 <ontrib*tion to 69@ at constant prices trade$ hotels$ transport and storage and comm*nication d*ring 2009310 is 9.26 percent as it was (.'' percent d*ring 2008309. Trade alone contrib*ted 6.&& percent in 2008309. 16.11 @rod*ctivity improvement in the e%port sector and greater diversification towards developing world$ which is growing at a faster pace than the advanced economies co*ld help a s*stainable growth in e%ports. )%ports to A2ther sian 4eveloping )conomies: A frican: and A;atin merican: economies grow at relatively faster rate and together acco*nted for a larger share of &(.& percent d*ring the first +*arter of 2010311 as compared to &2.1 percent in the same +*arter last year. TableB 16.2 shows !ndia:s Trade *p to -eptember 2010. Ta"le 16.* Indias orei!n Trade 'e%(e)"er *+1+
Ex%or(s ,`in #rores/ 2008309 2009310 20103 11=@? (1.941=42.41? (0.8&8=31.'? 8&.018=1(.2? I)%or(s ,`in #rores/ 141.86'=9&.0? 104.2('=326.'? 12'.018=19.9? Ex%or(s ,-'. )illion/ 1'.(89=26.1? 14.624=3(.4? 18.02&=2&.2? I)%or(s ,-'. )illion/ &1.1&6=(0.9? 21.'2(=3&0.9? 2(.141=26.1? Trade "alan#e ` #rore 369.92' 3&&.4&( 342.000 -'. )illion 31'.&4( 36.90& 39.118

=+igures in bra ,et denote to per entage variation over the orresponding period of the previous !ear) #our e: R$% $ulletin ()*). P-Provisional

16.12 "ore over it is stated in the #oreign Trade @olicy =#T@? 2009314 released by the "inistry of <ommerce and !nd*stry d*ring 2011312 to 201&314 !ndia sho*ld be able to come bac0 to high e%port growth path of aro*nd 2' percent per ann*m. s per the trends available so far there is li0elihood of e%ports attaining the target of ,-> 200 billion by 2010311 by the 6ovt. and reiterated by the <ommerce -ecretary$ "inistry of <ommerce. Cowever$ it co*ld be observed that !ndia:s e%port performance has been better than the over all global trends. 16.1& The e%port sectors that performed badly in .*ly 2010 incl*de leather$ electronics$ man made fiber$ ready made garments$ tea$ rice and handicrafts. Candicrafts contracted by 60 percent$ rice by 4' percent$ tea by 2' percent$ ready made garments by 2& percent and electronic prod*cts by 20.8 percent. 4ed*ctions in the e%ports of ready made garments and electronic items are mainly d*e to the )*ro Done <risis.

Economic Review 2010

110

Ex%or(s 16.14 !ndia:s e%port earnings d*ring 2010311 stood at 20' 400 million > from 1(8246 million > in 2009310 showing an increase of 1'.2 percent. n analysis of item wise e%ports for the period 20093 10 over 2008309 shows that earnings from the e%port of agro prod*cts increased by 1.09 percent ores and minerals increased by 10.96 percent while man*fact*red goods decreased to 6.'' percent. commodity wise analysis of e%port is shown in Table 16.& Ta"le416.1 Co))odi(5&6ise anal5sis o7 ex%or(s 7ro) *++*&+1 (o *+1+&11 ,. Million/
I(e)s gro @rod*cts 2resE"inerals "an*fact*red goods To(al
*++*&+1 *++1&+8 *++8&+9 *++9&+6 *++6&+2 *++2&+3 *++3&+0 *++0&1+ *+1+&11

6(2& 2000 40&22 9*3**

('&8 2&(0 48'22 6133*

84(2 '0(( 60(09 319+6

1021& 616& (2''4 1+1+22

126(4 699( 848'4 1*6*61

18441 9124 10&029 16*038

1('64 (81& 12&&'& 1311+1

1(('' 8669 11'2(1 123*86

9 9 9 *+98++

16.1' )%ports contin*ed to grow at an improved rate in the last +*arter of 2009310. 4*ring the first seven months of the fiscal e%ports grow by 26.( percent as against 21.8 percent decline recorded in the corresponding period of 2009. 4*ring this period e%port of petrole*m prod*cts increased by '4 percent$ <otton and fabrics 4' percent$ !ron ore by 60 percent$ 6emsE .ewellery by 21 percent$ -pices E <ondiments by &' percent and 4r*gs by 12 percent. 16.16 Tho*gh an impressive growth is attained in e%ports d*ring 2009310$ the val*e of e%ports =,-> 121.& billion? remained lower than that recorded in pre3crisis period$ the val*e was ,-> 122.' billion. <ommodity wise analysis for the first +*arter of this fiscal shows that e%ports contracted in a few commodities li0e petrole*m prod*cts$ transport e+*ipment$ gems E jewellery$ iron ores$ cotton yarn$ fabrics$ dr*gs and pharmace*ticals . The higher inflation differential between !ndia and its major trading partners is a so*rce of press*re on the competitiveness of !ndian e%ports. s on 2ctober 22$ 2010 the foreign e%change reserve of !ndia stood at ,-> 29.'4 billion. !ndia:s e%port to principal region percentage share is given in ppendi% 16.4 16.1( !ndia:s e%port performance remained a better position than the over all global trends. The anticipated growth rate of e%ports made by <"!) is 1'.2 percent d*ring 2010311 as against 2.6 percent decline recorded in the preceding fiscal year. !n val*e terms the e%pectation is ,-4 20' billion. 16.18 The !"# has revised the 64@ growth rate of the developed economies *pward to 2.8 percent in 2ctober 2010 from 2.& percent projected in 2010 pril and 2.1 percent projected in 2010 .an*ary. !"# also projected a higher rise in the prices of non3f*el commodities. These international developments are e%pected to benefit !ndia:s e%ports. <"!):s projection of )%port3 !mport d*ring 2010311 are given in ppendi%B16.' The <"!):s #orecast reflects that the e%ports from !ndia rise by 1'.2 percent in 2010311 =#ig. 16.1?

Economic Review 2010

1*+

i!. 16.1 CMIE's Projection of Exports

#our e: -.%/, ()*)

Ta"le. 16.8 Indias Ex%or( Earnin!s 7ro) *++1&+8 (o *++0&1+ (`in crores) : in -'. )illion/
Ex%or( Earnin!s ,`in #rores/ ;ear 200&304 200430' 200'306 200630( 200(308 2008309 2009310 Oil 16&9( &1404 '1'&& 84'20 114192 12&&98 1&2616 Non Oil 2(6969 &4&9&' 40488' 48(2'9 '416(2 (1(&'( (12'09 To(al 29&&6( &('&40 4'6418 '(1((9 6''864 840('' 84'12' Ex%or( Earnin!s ,-'. )illion/ Oil &'68 6989 11640 186&' 28&6& 2('4( 281&1 Non Oil 602(4 (6'4( 914'1 10(((9 1&4'41 1'((48 1'0'&1 To(al 6&84& 8&'&6 10&091 126414 162904 18'29' 1(8662

#our e:R $% $ulletin Nove'ber ()*)"

I)%or( 16.19 1eflecting the demand associated with rob*st domestic growth$ imports increased at a higher pace tho*gh with some voltality d*ring the year so far. 2il imports registered a growth of '4.8 percent d*ring the first +*arter of 2010311 d*e to the combined effect of increase in vol*me alone with higher international cr*de oil prices relative to the corresponding +*arter of previo*s year. 9on oil imports increased by &&.( percent d*ring pril3 *g*st 2010. 16.20 -tronger growth in both oil and non oil imports relative to e%ports res*lted in a wider merchandise trade deficit d*ring pril3-eptember 2010 at ,-> 6&.2 billion as compared with ,-> 46.9 billion d*ring the corresponding period of the previo*s year.

Economic Review 2010

1*1

Ta"le 4 16.9 Indias I)%or( d<rin! *++1&+8 (o *++0&1+ ,in ` Crores and -'. )illion/
I)%or( ,` #rores/ ;ear 200&304 200430' 200'306 200630( 200(308 2008309 2009310 Oil 94'20 1&4094 194640 2'8'(2 &206'' 419968 411'(4 Non Oil 264'88 &669(1 46'(69 '819&' 6916'( 9'4468 944890 To(al ,Rs.#rores/ &'9108 '0106' 660409 840'06 1012&12 1&(44&6 1&'6469 Oil 20'69 29844 4&96& '694' (664' 9&(62 8(121 I)%or( ,in -'. )illion/ Non Oil '('80 816(& 10'20& 128(90 1(1(9' 21002' 199(02 To(al (8149 111'1( 149166 18'(&' 2'14&9 &0&696 28682&

#our e: R$% $ulletin Nove'ber ()*)"

16.21 !mports d*ring 2010311 stood at > &4&000 million as against > 28609' million in 2009310 showing an *pward trend of 19.89 percent. !mports of @2; amo*nts to >104$000 million as it was >86$80( million in the previo*s year mar0ing an increase of 19.81 percent. !mport of 9on3 @2; stood at 2&9000 million dollar as against 199288 million dollar in the previo*s year showing an increase of 19.9& percent. !mport percentage of 64@ stood at 21.1 percent. Ta"le416.6 Co))odi(5 6ise anal5sis o7 I)%or(s 7ro) *++*&+1 (o *+1+&11
I(e)s @2; 9on @2; *++*&+1 1(6(4 4&8'( *++1&+8 20'82 '(61' *++8&+9 298&& 81644 *++9&+6 4&9'8 10'189 *++6&+2 '(062 128000 *++2&+3 (96'( 1(0128 *++3&+0 91462 20(868 *++0&1+ 8680( 199288 *+1+&11 104000 2&9000

#our e: -.%/ &e e'ber ()*)"

16.22 periodical analysis of imports reveals that d*ring pril32ctober 2010 imports grew by 26.1 percent. This is a recovery over a steep 26.9 percent decline recorded in the corresponding period of 2009. The period *nder reference import of cr*de petrole*m and petrole*m prod*cts rise by 24.6 percent. !mport of 9on @2; item also showed an *pward trend by showing an increase of (' percent from ,-> 12.& billion to 21.' billion ,-4 in the corresponding period of previo*s year. 16.2& s per the <"!):s prediction imports grow by 19.9 percent in 2010311$ against a decline of 4.4 percent recorded in the preceding year. @2; imports are e%pected to grow by 19.8 percent and 9on @2; imports are projected by 19.9 percent. The percentage share of !ndia:s import commodities by share of gro*psFco*ntries is given in ppendi% 16.6

A'EAN A!ree)en(
16.24 The -) 9 !ndia #ree Trade greement T!6 is a typical /T2 complaint free trade area agreement. The member <o*ntries are !ndonesia$ -ingapore$ "alaysia$ @hilippines$ 5*rma$ "yanmar$ Thailand$ <ambodia$ Gietnam and ;avos. The sched*le of thariff red*ction commitments *nderta0en by !#T members varies. )ach -) 9 member has a separate tariff red*ction sched*le. The tariff red*ction are divided in to fo*r broad categories namely 9ormal Trac0$ -ensitive Trac0$ -pecial @rod*cts Cighly -ensitive list and the )%cl*sion list. !ndia being predominantly a cons*mer co*ntry$ free flow of cons*mer items and agric*lt*ral items from the 9orth )ast <o*ntries have great impact its economic scenario.

Economic Review 2010

1**

16.2' !n the case of !#T the -o*th !ndian -tates$ especially Herala will be more affected beca*se their prod*ction str*ct*re are +*iet similar to those of the -) 9 <o*ntries especially in the field of agric*lt*re and allied sectors and agro based ind*stries. -imilarity is too close when Herala economy is ta0en separately for a comparative analysis. 1*bber$ <ocon*t$ Tea <offee$ -pices$ <ashew$ Tropical fish varieties$ viI. -hrimp$ t*na$ <*ttlefish etc. are the leading areas of Herala:s specialiIation. These items are prod*ced both for cons*mption and e%ports. !t is worth mentioning that the very same goods are among the more areas of specialiIation for -o*th )ast sian <o*ntries. nother thing to be noticed is that the areas *nder prod*ction of tropical commodities have been increasing both in Herala as well as -) 9 9ations. !n Herala the concentration towards tropical commodities is being promoted as a part of national policy in !ndia which laid a lot of emphasis on earning as well as saving of foreign e%change. 6iven the competitive nat*re of the prod*ction str*ct*re of Herala vis3J3vis the -) 9 nations$ and considering the fact that adj*stment problems wo*ld be more severe in s*ch overlapping areas of prod*ction in the state$ partic*larly its farming comm*nity sho*ld be given ade+*ate protection d*ring the transition period.

Ex%or( I)%or( Trade o7 =erala ($ro<!$ Co#$in Por(

16.26 major portion of trade operations in the state is being cond*cted thro*gh the <ochin @ort. !mportant e%port items are pepper$ cashew$ coir and coir prod*cts$ tea$ cardamom$ ginger$ spices oil and marine prod*cts. 4*ring 2009310 total traffic handled by the port increased to 1(4.29 la0h tones from 1'4.94 la0h tones d*ring 2008309 showing a increase of 12.49 percent. 2f this import represented 1&8.&& la0h tones and e%port represented &'.96 la0h tones.

Co))odi(5 Co)%osi(ion o7 Ex%or(s ($ro<!$ Co#$in Por(

16.2( Total +*antity of e%ports thro*gh <ochin @ort d*ring the year *nder review had increased to &'.96 la0h "T from 2(.10 la0h "T in the previo*s year. !n 2009310 a rise of &2.(0 percent in +*antitative terms and a fall of 2.86 percent in val*e term is visible. s compared to the previo*s year in the year *nder report all commodities e%ported thro*gh the port showed a positive trend e%cept coffee and cashew 0ernels. 4*ring 2009310 e%port of tea increased by 6(.62 percent$ -ea #oods by '& percent$ <oir prod*cts by 124 percent$ spices by (0.44 per cent. <offee decreased by '1 percent and cashew 0ernels by 4.(1 percent. 4etails of commodity K wise e%port thro*gh <ochin @ort is f*rnished on ppendi%.16.(. 6rowth rate of spices e%port thro*gh <ochin @ort from 200430' to 2009310 is given in fig. 16.2

Economic Review 2010

1*1

i!. 16.*

#our e: -o hin Port Trust

16.28 Tea$ <ashew Hernels$ -ea foods$ <oir prod*cts -pices$ <offee etc are the main items e%ported thro*gh the <ochin @ort. 2f the total e%ports tea constit*ted &.20 percent$ cashew 0ernels 1.'1 percent$ -ea #ood &.84 percent$ coir prod*cts 4.90 percent$ spices 2.2( percent$ coffee 0.86 percent and miscellaneo*s items incl*ding @2; constit*ted 8&.4& percent.

Co))odi(5 Co)%osi(ion o7 =erala>s I)%or(s ($ro<!$ =o#$i Por(

16.29 4*ring 2009310 imports thro*gh <ochin port increased to 1&8.&& la0h "T from 12(.84 la0h "T in 2008309$ registering a growth of 8.21 percent. !tems of imports incl*des fertiliIers E 1aw materials$ !ron$ -teal E machinery$ 9ews @rint and <ashew n*t. !mport of fertiliIers E 1aw "aterials increased to 6.22 la0h "T in the year *nder review as it was '.( la0h "T in the previo*s year. !n the year *nder report #ertilisers and 1aw materials$ 9ews print and miscellaneo*s items showed positive trend where as iron steel and machinery$ cashew n*t etc. showed negative trend. 2f the total import #ertiliIers and 1aw materials stood at 4.49 percent$ !ron E -teel 0.81 percent$ 9ews @rint 0.62 percent$ <ashew n*t 2.08 percent and "iscellaneo*s items stood at 92 percent in the year *nder report. !n the year *nder report$ import of iron$ steel and machinery declined to 41.(' percent. !mport of 9ews @rint increased to ' percent. !mport of <ashew n*t has decreased by 8.68 percent. <ommodity wise import thro*gh <ochin @ort is given in ppendi% 16.8.

Car!o $andled "5 =o#$i Por(

16.&0 !n the year *nder review e%port of cargo =both coastal E foreign? from <ochin @ort increased to &'.96 la0h "T from 2(.10 la0h "T in the previo*s year registered a growth of &2.69 percent. !n the year *nder report import of cargo thro*gh the <ochin @ort showed a growth of 1&8.&& la0h "T as against an import of 12(.84 la0h "T in the previo*s year showing a growth of 8.21 percent. 4*ring 2009310 coastal e%port and foreign e%port has increased to 12.8& la0h "T and 2&.1& la0h "T from 9.81 la0h "T and 1(.29 la0h "T respectively from 2008309. 5oth coastal and foreign import d*ring the year *nder review reported a growth of 11.(4 percent and 6.(0 percent respectively. 4etails are shown in table 16.(.

Economic Review 2010

1*8

Ta"le & 16.2 Car!o Handled a( Co#$in Por( d<rin! *++9&+6 (o *++0&1+ ,In ?a@$ MT/
Ex%or( Tra77i# 1 <oastal #oreign To(al
*++9&+6 *++6&+2 *++2&+3 *++3&+0 *++0&1+ *++9&+6 *++6&+2

I)%or(
*++2&+3 *++3&+0 *++0&1+

1 11.&' 1(.86 *0.*1

8 1'.69 19.0' 18.28

9 14.92 19.99 18.01

6 9.81 1(.29 *2.1+

2 12.8& 2&.1& 19.06

0 29.61 80.06 1+0.62

1+ 28.(2 89.11 112.31

11 &6.6 86.04 1**.68

1* &8.1( 89.6( 1*2.38

11 42.6' 9'.68 113.11

#our e: -o hin Port Trust

Ex%or( o7 Marine Prod<#(s & Na(ional '#enario

16.&1 )%port of "arine @rod*cts d*ring 2009310 stood at 6(84&6 "T val*ed at 1s.10048.'& crores as against an e%port of 6028&' "T val*ed 1s.860(.94 crores in 2008309. 5y +*antity it has been increased to 12.'4 percent and in val*e terms it has been increased to 16.(4 percent. 4*ring the year *nder review by the e%port of "arine @rod*cts !ndia:s earnings in dollar terms stood at ,-> 21&2.84 million showing an increase of 11.(' percent. The e%port trend of "arine @rod*cts in !ndia is shown in table 16.8. Ta"le &16.3 Ex%or( Trend o7 Marine Prod<#(s ro) India ,A(54 in MTB Cal<e4 ` in #roreB .4 -' . Million/
De(ails 1 L*antity ="Tnones? 1*pees=crores? ,-> =million?
#our e: .P/&0

*++8&+9 1 4&1629 6646.64 14(8.48

*++9&+6 8 '12164 (24'.&0 1644.21

*++6&+2 9 612641 8&6&.'& 18'2.9&

*++2&+3 6 '41(61 (620.92 1899.09

*++3&+0 2 6028&' 860(.94 1908.6&

*++0&1+ 3 6(84&6 10048.'& 21&2.84

Dro6($ in *++0&1+ 7ro) *++3&+0 0 ('601=12.'4? 1440.'9=16.(4? 224.21=11.('?

16.&2 )*ropean ,nion is the largest gro*p mar0et for marine prod*cts from !ndia acco*nting for a share of &0 percent in val*e and 24.29 in +*antity followed by -o*th )ast sia 21.28 percentage in +*antity b*t in val*e terms stood at 14.(2. !n val*e terms <hina stood at 1(.82 and 21.26 percent in +*antity. .apan in val*e terms stood at 12.8& and 9.24 percent in +*antity ,- by 10.08 in val*e terms and 4.9& percent in +*antity and "iddle )ast stands '.'1 percent in +*antity and in val*e terms '.1' percent. )%ports to co*ntries li0e ;ibya$ 1e*nion islands$ *stralia$ @*ertorico$ 4ominican 1ep*blic$ Henya$ ,0raine$ 5raIil$ etc. showed a positive growth rate. "ajor importers of marine prod*cts from !ndia and their share in val*e d*ring 2009310 is f*rnished in the diagram =#ig.16.&?. 16.&& mar0et wise analysis of marine prod*cts show that )*ropean *nion was top most c*stomer with +*antity of 164800 "T followed by -o*th )ast sia 14 4&'& "T$ and then <hina with 144290 "T. )%port to .apan d*ring the period *nder report increased to 62690 "T from '(2(1 "T in the preceding year. )%port to ,decreased to &&444 "T from &68(( "T in the previo*s year. =details are given in ppendi% 16.9. i!.16.1

Economic Review 2010

1*9

#our e: .P/&0

16.&4 The major marine prod*cts e%ported are #roIen -hrimp$ #roIen fish$ #roIen c*ttle fish$ #roIen s+*id$ 4ried items$ ;ive items and <hilled items. 4etails of item wise e%port of marine prod*cts from !ndia for the last five years are given in ppendi%16.10. !n the year *nder report when compared to the previo*s year all items e%ported showed a positive trend. The prod*cts s*ch as #roIen shrimp =&.6 percent?$ #roIen fish =9.4 percent?$ #roIen c*ttle fish =2'.1& percent?$ #roIen s+*id =(.'6 percent?$ 4ried items =48.49 percent? ;ive items ='9.9& percent?$ <hilled items =&4.&& percent? etc showed an increasing trend. !n the year *nder report an analysis of e%port of marine prod*cts from o*r co*ntry show that +*antitatively the e%port of #roIen #ish stood in the ape% level by e%porting &8.4( percent$ b*t in val*e terms the top contrib*ter was #r.-hrimp with an earning of 41.62 percent tho*gh +*antitatively it stood in the second position.

Ex%or( o7 Marine Prod<#(s 7ro) =erala

16.&' "arine e%ports Herala d*ring 2009310 stood at 10(29& " Tonnes val*ed ` 16(002 la0h as against an e%port of 100(80 " Tonnes val*ed `1'(218 la0h d*ring 2008309. !n the acco*nt of !ndia:s marine e%port in the year 2009310 Herala:s contrib*tion stood at 1'.81 percent in vol*me and in val*e terms stood at 16.62 percent. s compared to the previo*s year both interms of +*antity and val*e Herala:s share showed a decreasing level. Table.16.9 shown the e%port details of marine prod*cts of Herala compared to all !ndia in +*antity and val*e for years. =200430' to 2009310?. i! 16.8 Ex%or( (rend o7 Marine %rod<#(s =erala : India ,` Crore/ 1003&00 (o *++0&1+

#our e: .P&/0

Economic Review 2010

1*6

Ta"le16.0 Ex%or( Trend o7 Marine Prod<#(s India : =erala *++8&+9 (o *++0&1+

;ear 200430' 200'306 200630( 200(308 2008309 2009310
#our e: .P&/0

INDIA A<an(i(5 Cal<e ,`?a@$/ ,Tonnes/ 461&29 664669 '12164 (24'&0 612642 8&6&'& '41(01 (62092 6028&' 860(.94 6(84&6 10048'&

=ERA?A A<an(i(5 Cal<e ,` ?a@$ ,Tonnes/ 8(&&( 11'(42 9(&11 12'(6' 108616 1'2412 100&18 14&091 100(80 1'(218 10(29& 16(002

=ERA?As s$areE A<an(i(5 18.9& 19 1(.(4 18.'2 16.(2 1'.81 Cal<e 1(.41 1(.&6 19.00 18.(8 18.26 16.62

16.&6 n analysis of e%port of marine prod*cts from Herala shows that items s*ch as #r.-hrimp$ #r.-+*id$ 4ried items etc. mar0ed a negative trend where as #r.#ish$ #r$<*ttle fish$ ;ive items$ chilled items etc. showed positive trend. "ajor item of e%port was #r.shrimp 24 percent$ #r.#ish 2( percent$ #r. <*ttle fish 22 percent and #r.-+*id 1( percent. ;ive items and chilled items contrib*ted 0.4 percent and 2.( percent respectively.

Ta"le &16.1+ I(e) 6ise Ex%or(s o7 Marine Prod<#(s 7ro) =erala D<rin! *++3&+0 and *++0&1+
'l.No 1 1 2 & 4 ' 6 ( 8 I(e) * #roIen -hrimp #roIen fish #roIen <*ttle #ish #roIen -+*id 4ried !tems ;ive !tems <hilled !tems 2thers To(al *++3&*++0 A(5. Cal. ` ,Tons/ ,#rores/ 1 8 2'&96 '88.8( 2'66( 208.19 180(' &&0.04 19(60 24(.91 1&8 11.40 &04 20.62 2280 6(.6& 9160 9(.'1 1++23+ 192*.13 *++0&*+1+ A(5. Cal. ` ,Tons/ ,#rores/ 9 6 2'290 646.(' 29111 216.&8 2&1'( 402.0' 18(1& 209.18 (8 16.44 4&1 2(.9& 28'6 (1.89 (6'6 (9.41 1+2*01 162+.+*

#our e: .P/&0

Cas$e6
16.&( 4*ring the period *nder report the e%port earnings from <ashew and allied prod*cts were 1s.2$9&0 crores =,-> 618 million?. !ndia contin*ed to be the largest prod*cer of raw cashew n*t in the world by achieving a prod*ction of 61&000 "T d*ring the year 2009310. Box4 16.* The -hare of agric*lt*ral prod*cts in the total e%port earnings of the co*ntry d*ring 20093 10 is '.'6 percent and cashew 0ernels ran0ed seventh among them contrib*ting '.96 percent. This acco*nted to 0.&& percent of the total foreign e%change earnings of the co*ntry thro*gh e%ports.

Economic Review 2010

1*2

16.&8 Total e%port of cashew 0ernels from !ndia d*ring 2009310 was 1$08$120 "T val*ed at ` 2$906 crores =,-> 61& million? as against 1$09'22 "T val*ed ` 2$988 crores =,->6'0 million?e%ported d*ring 2008309. /hen compared to the previo*s year it showed a decrease of 1.28 percent in +*antity$ 2.(6 percent decrease in r*pee terms and '.(& percent decrease in ,-> terms. The average *nit e%port price realiIed d*ring the year was ` 268.(6 per Hg. compared to ` 2(2.86 per Hg d*ring 2008309 recording a decrease of 1.' percent. Table.16.11 shows the e%port of cashew 0ernels from !ndia to 4ifferent Dones. 16.&9 <o*ntry3wise analysis of e%port of cashew 0ernels from !ndia shows that ,- remained as the main c*stomer by importing 28.49 per cent of the total e%port. , ) and 9etherland shares the second largest c*stomers of cashew 0ernels by importing 16.80 percent and 9.'4 percent respectively. Ta"le 16.11 Ex%or( o7 Cas$e6 =ernels 7ro) India (o Di77eren( Fones
Fone merica )*rope /est siaE frica -o*th )ast E#ar )ast sia 2ceania To(al *++3&+0 A<an(i(5 Cal<e ,`#rores/ ,MT/ &(694 100'.61 &&&01 906.0& 2(&(8 (6&.(( 8901 2'4.46 2249 '8.'2 1+09** *033.8+ *++0&1+ A<an(i(5 Cal<e ,`#rores/ ,MT/ &1686 829.04 &2'66 880.1& &1'(2 8(0.(6 10'90 286.(& 1(0( &9.1( 1+31*+ *0+9.3* Di77eren#e ,E/ A<an(i(5 Cal<e ,`#rores/ ,MT/ 31'.44 31(.'6 32.21 32.86 1'.&2 14.01 18.98 12.68 324.10 3&&.0( &1.*3 &*.26

#our e: -ashew /1port Pro'otion oun il"

16.40 !n the year *nder report Herala:s cashew Hernels e%port decreased to 61698 tonne from 6&(29 tonnes in the presiding year. !n val*e terms it decreased by 4.(0 percent. 5oth in val*e terms and +*antity Herala:s cashew 0ernel e%port showed a negative trend. 2f the total e%ports of <ashew 0ernals from !ndia Herala:s contrib*tion +*antitative terms stood at '(.06 percent and in val*e terms stood at '6.29 percent. )%port of cashew Hernels from !ndia and Herala are given in table 16.12. Ta"le 16.1* Ex%or( o7 Cas$e6 =ernels4 =erala and India ,*++1&+8 (o *++0&1+/ ,A<an(i(5 in MT and Cal<e in ` Crores/
;ear 200&304 200430' 200'306 200630( 200(308 2008309 2009310 =eralaG A<an(i(5 Cal<e 68119 1204.'6 (99'0 1(1'.94 (4&(6 1622.82 (2860 1'04.8( 69298 1&9'.02 6&(29 1(16.'2 61698 16&'.(9 India A<an(i(5 Cal<e 100828 1804.4& 12666( 2(09.24 11414& 2'14.86 118'40 24''.1' 114&40 2288.90 109'2& 2988.4 108120 290'.82 '$are o7 =erala ,E/ A<an(i(5 Cal<e 6(.'6 66.(6 6&.12 6&.&4 6'.16 64.'& 61.46 61.29 60.61 60.9' '8.19 '(.44 '(.06 '6.29

2/1port through -o hin Port" #our e: The -ashew /1port Pro'otion -oun il of %ndia"

16.41 The e%port of <ashew n*t shell li+*id from !ndia d*ring 2009310 was 9(48 "T val*ed ` 24.12 crores ,-> '.08 million as against an e%port of 9099 "T <ashew -hell li+*id Gal*ed ` 26.06 cores ,-> '.6( million d*ring 2008309. There was an increase of (.1& percent in +*antity$ decrease of (.44 percent in r*pee val*e terms and a decrease of 10.4 percent in ,-> terms. The *nit val*e of <ashew n*t -hell li+*id d*ring the period *nder report stood at ` 24.(4 per Hg as against ` 28.64 per Hg in the previo*s year. )%port of cashew shell li+*id from !ndia d*ring 2008309 and 2009310 are f*rnished in table 16.1&.

Economic Review 2010

1*3

Ta"le .16.11 Ex%or( o7 Cas$e6 n<( '$ell ?iH<id : Cardinal 7ro) India d<rin! *++3&+0 : *++0&1+
'l. No 1 2 & 4 ' 6 ( 8 9 10 11 12 1& 14 Co<n(ries ,<hina Horea .apan !ndonesia Taiwan -lovenia Thailand )gypt -o*th frica ,.H Dimbabwe 1*ssia 2thers To(al A(5 ,MT/ '9&2 10&4 1048 &&( 21& 22 162 &1 (0 &2 1(0 &2 16 0 0+00 *++3 &+0 Cal<e ,` #rs./ 1'.(1 &.(8 &.1( 1.01 0.4( 0.14 0.(1 0.11 0.24 0.1& 0.42 0.08 0.09 0 *6.+6 A(5 ,MT/ 482( 2((0 1&68 &22 1(8 6' 41 &1 20 16 3 3 3 110 0283 *++0&1+ Cal<e ,` #rs./ 9.(4 (.94 &.89 0.99 0.&( 0.&' 0.1' 0.12 0.0' 0.06 3 3 3 0.42 *8.1*

#our e: -ashew /1port Pro'otion oun il of %ndia

16.42 )%port of cashew n*t shell li+*id from Herala increased to 24'6 tonnes from 221( tonnes in the previo*s year. /hen compared with 2008 where as the e%port of <ashew -hell li+*id was '&&& tonnes$ a sharp decline is visible in 2009 and 2010. 2f the total cashew shell li+*id e%port$ Herala:s contrib*tion stood at 2' @ercent. Trend of <ashew n*t -hell ;i+*id )%port from Herala is given in the #ig 16.' below. The major mar0ets were ,- $ <hina$ Horea$ .apan and !ndonesia.. i!.16.9

The details of e%port of cashew n*t shell li+*id from Herala E !ndia is f*rnished in table.16.14 Ta"le. 16.18 Ex%or( o7 Cas$e6 n<( s$ell ?iH<id =erala : India ,*++1&+8 (o *++0&1+/ ,A<an(i(5 in MT and Ial<e in ` #rores/
;ear =eralaG India

Economic Review 2010

1*0

1 200&304 200430' 200'306 200630( 200(308 2008309 2009310

A<an(i(5 * 6(84 66(4 '8&4 &(&6 '410 221( 24'6

Cal<e 1 6.68 6.'8 '.9( '.(0 (.41 &.91 3

A<an(i(5 ,"T? 8 6926 (4(4 640' 61&9 (81& 9099 9(48

Cal<e ,`.<rore? 9 (.0& (.91 (.09 10.29 11.9( 26.06 24.12

2/1port through -o hin Port #our e: The -ashew /1port Pro'otion -oun il of %ndia

16.4& !n 2009310$ )%port of cashew shell li+*id to ,- thro*gh <ochin @ort stood at 14&0 tonnes and e%port to -ri ;an0a stood at 9'9 tonnes. 2f the total cashew shell li+*id e%port thro*gh <oching @ort d*ring 2009310 e%port to ,- was '8 percent and e%port to -ri ;an0a was &9 percent. The total +*antity of foreign e%ports stood at 2&89 tonnes. 16.44 !mport of 1aw cashew n*t in !ndia increased to ('28'4 "T in 2009310 from 60'8'0 "T in 2008309. !n the reporting year in val*e terms it increased to ` &0&(.&' crores as against a val*e of ` 26&2.40 crores in the previo*s year. The *nit import price for raw cashew n*t was `40.&4 Hg d*ring 2009310 as against ` 4&.4'FHg d*ring the previo*s year. !n Herala import of raw cashew n*t thro*gh <ochin @ort has decreased to 28(49( "T in 2009310 from &148&1 "T in 2008309. !mport of 1aw cashew n*t to !ndia d*ring 2008309 and 2009310 are given in Table 16.1'. Ta"le 16.19 I)%or( o7 Ra6 Cas$e6 n<(s (o India d<rin! *++3&+0 : *++0&1+
Co<n(ries !vory <oast 6*inea 5issa* Tan Dania 5enin !ndonesia 6hana "oIambi+*e <hambia 9igeria -enegal 6*inea Henya -ingapore )lsalvador "adagascar Togo @anama @hilippines 2thers To(al A<an(i(5 MT 21(24 89691 840&& 61126 41'68 4'4'0 2&449 10481 119&9 1&206 4'62 664' ''8 3 &84 20' 268 1(0 &91 6+939+ *++3&+0 Cal<e ,` Crore/ 8&&.(4 46(.91 &&6.18 298.6' 1'&.99 2&1.94 112.'9 44.(6 48.4( 4(.91 21.(8 26.8' 1.82 3 1.48 1.0& 0.(1 0.'4 2.0( *61*.8+ A<an(i(5 MT 2&81(9 1&&994 1149'' '182' '0061 4(821 &42(1 2'(8( 1('&4 1'846 1'('1 1224 ('4 484 41& 202 12' 11( &'& 29*398 *++0&1+ Cal<e ,` Crore/ (9(.6( '(4.29 4'1.28 299.' 1(1.88 264.'9 140.86 12(.26 6'.'' '1.'9 62.22 4.64 &.14 1.(6 1.46 0.9& 0.'0 0.&' 1(.88 1+12.19

0nnual Report ())3-*) The -ashew /1port Pro'otion -oun il of %ndia

Co77ee

Economic Review 2010

11+

16.4' /orld <offee e%port decreased to 86.& millon bags =2ctober 2009 to *g*st 2010? from 90.& " bags in the same period of previo*s year $ a decline of 4 " 5ags. The decline in world e%port was res*lt of lower prod*ction in <olombia and 5raIil. Total e%ports for the eight months of calendar year 2010 were 64 millon bags compared with 66.8 million bags fo the same period of 2009.

Co77ee Ex%or( 7ro) India

16.46 The +*ant*m of !ndian coffee e%ports s*ggest that the global economic recession has not affected the !ndian coffee e%ports. !ndian coffee e%ports in +*antity terms were high by 10.42 tho*sand tones. The val*e realiIation of <offee was estimated at ` 2$1924' crores compared to ` 2$24261 crores in the previo*s year$ a decline of ` '019 crores. 4omestic coffee e%port from !ndia from 200430' to 2009310 is given in Table 16.16. Ta"le. 16.16 Do)es(i# Co77ee Ex%or( 7ro) *++8&+9 (o *++0&1+ ,<% (o A<!<s(/
;ear 1 200430' 200'306 200630( 200(308 2008309 2009310
#our e: -offee $oard *Provisional

A<an(i(5 Tonnes * 211(6' 201''' 249029 218996 1961(2 206'89M

E#$an!e oIer ($e %reIio< s 5ear 1 3 =3?4.8 2&.'' =3?12.06 =3?10.2' =N?'.&1

Cal<e ,` #rore/ 8 1224.6( 1'10.&8 200(.90 2046.29 2242.64 2192.4'M

E#$an!e oIer ($e %reIio<s 5ear 9 3 2&.&2 &2.94 1.9 9.6 =3?2.24

16.4( )%port of coffee thro*gh <ochin @ort d*ring 2009310 stood at &0(81 "T as against an e%port of 6&1&0 "T in 2008309 showing a decrease of '1.24 percent. !n val*e terms e%port has been decresed to ` 426.'2 cores in 2009310 from ` (11.6( crores in 2008309.

Coir and Coir Prod<#(s

16.48 )%port of <oir E <oir @rod*cts from !ndia d*ring 2009310 val*ed at ,-> million 160.19. s compared to 2008309 an increase of 8.06 percent is seen in the reporting period. ,.-. remained as the major c*stomer by contrib*ting &1 percent of the total earning. )%port earnings from <hina$ 9etherland and ,H were ,-> million 12.94$ 12.(9 and 11.18 respectively. 4estination of !ndia:s e%port of coir and coir prod*cts are f*rnished in ppendi% 16.11. 16.49 )%port of coir and coir prod*cts thro*gh the port of <ochin stood at 1(610' tonnes. 2f this 16202' tonnes of e%port were #oreign e%ports and 14080.' tonnes of e%port were !ndian <oastal )%ports. !n the year *nder report e%port increased by 4& percent . )%port item comprises of coir mat$ coir yarn and other coir prod*cts. )%port of coir prod*cts thro*gh the port of <ochin for the eight years are given in the following graph. i!. 16.6 Trends o7 Coir and Coir Prod<#(s 7ro) Co#$in Por( ,A<an(i(5 in Tons/

Economic Review 2010

111

#our e: -o hin Port Trust

16.'0 )%port to the adjacent co*ntries stood at 1&8&89 tonnes and #ar )astern <o*ntries stood at &8&4 tonnes )*ropean co*ntries stood at (681 tonnes and other merican co*ntries stood at '684 tonnes . 4estination3wise e%port from <ochin port for the year 2008309 and 2009310 is given in TableB16.1(.

Ta"le4 16.12 Des(ina(ion&6ise Ex%or( o7 Coir : Coir Prod<#(s 7ro) Co#$in Por( d<rin! *++3&+0 : *++0&1+ ,in (onnes/
Co<n(ries !ndian @orts djacent <o*ntries #ar )astern <o*ntries .apan 2ther sian <o*ntries ,.H 6ermany 1*ssia 2ther )*ropean <o*ntries ,.-. <anada 2ther merican <o*ntries frican <o*ntries *++3&+0 3 &2'& 8'94 101( 4'84 99&( (4'2 496 2608& '&410 2481 1241 1986 14080.' 1&840& &8&4 2( '1& 2'4 1661 3 (641 ('6 3 '684 2106 *++0&1+

Economic Review 2010

11*

*stralia E 9ewIealand To(al

2484 1*1+13

1148 1261+9

#our e: 0d'inistration Reports -o hin Port Trust, ())4-)3 5 ())3-*)

'%i#es
16.'1 !n spite of the global economic recession spices e%port from !ndia showed an *pward trend and reached an all time record both in vol*me and val*e in the year *nder reports. 4*ring 2009310 e%port has increased to '02('0 tonnes from 4(0'20 tonnes in 2008309 showing a growth of 6.8' percent. !n val*e terms it stood at ` ''60.'0 crores in 2009310 as against ` '&00.2' crores in 20083 09. 4*ring the period *nder report a rise of '.0 percent in val*e terms is recorded. !n dollar terms the increase is 0.' percent. 16.'2 n analysis of e%port of spices and spice prod*cts shows that spice oil and oleoresins incl*ding mint prod*cts contrib*ted &4 percent of the total e%port earnings. <hilli contrib*ted 2& percent followed by <*min 10 per cent$ pepper 6 percent and t*rmeric ( percent. 4*ring the year 2009310 !ndian spices and spice prod*cts reached more than 140 co*ntries in the world. The leading among them are ,- 16 percent "alaysia 8 percent$ <hina ( percent$ , ) 6 percent$ and ,H ' percent 16.'& n item wise analysis shows that in the year 2009310 !ndia has e%ported 19('0 tonnes of pepper val*ed ` &1&.9& crores as against 2'2'0 tonnes val*ed ` 41&.(' crores in 2008309 registering a decline of 22 percent in vol*me and 24 percent in val*e. ,- is the largest b*yer of pepper in the world mar0et. 4*ring 2008309 !ndia:s e%ports to major destinations li0e ,- $ )*ropean ,nion etc. declined. ,- contin*ed as the major mar0et for pepper and has imported 8'2' "T$ acco*nting for 4& percent of total pepper. 2ther major b*yers are ,H =1600 "T?$ !taly =8&' "T?$ <anada =890 "T?$ .apan =600? "T and 6ermany =880 "T?. 16.'4 !n recent years$ !ndian pepper prod*ction remained stagnant aro*nd '0$000 "T d*e to low prod*ctivity of aged and diseases affected pepper plantation. Gietnam a major competitor of !ndian pepper mar0et possess a do*ble prod*ction of !ndian pepper and they become the major s*ppliers in international mar0et. 4*e to economic slow down the major ,- companies are 0eeping low inventories res*lting in low import vol*me res*lted a low e%port of pepper. 16.'' 4*ring 2009310 !ndia e%ported 19(' "T of <ardamom =small? val*ed ` 16'.(0 crores and 1000 "T <ardamom =large? val*ed ` 1(.88 crores. <hilli is the largest spice item e%ported from !ndia in terms of vol*me and in terms of val*e. . 4*ring the year *nder review !ndia e%ported 2$04$000 tonnes of <hilli and <hilli prod*cts val*ed `.1291.(& crores showing a increase of 8.'1 percent in vol*me and 19.' percent in val*e as compared to the previo*s year. 16.'6 4*ring 2009310 !ndia e%ported ''00 "T 6inger val*ed ` 46.(' crores and '0$('0 "T$ T*rmeric val*ed at ` &81.2& crore and 4(2'0 tonnes coriander val*ed at ` 22'.8' crores. The e%port of t*rmeric from !ndia d*ring 2009310 is an all time high record in terms of val*e. The major b*yers are , )$ !ran$ 5angladesh$ "alaysia and .apan. !ndia is the largest s*pplier of t*rmeric in the world mar0et. 4*ring 2009310 the e%port of spice oil and oleorsins decreased to 6('0 tonnes from 68'0 tonnes in 2008309. !n val*e terms it decreased to `.(08.(' crores in the year *nder report from ` (20.' crores in the previo*s year. The e%port of mint prod*cts d*ring 2009310 is 19000 "T val*ed ` 1189.(2 crores against 20'00 "T val*ed ` 1420.2' crores in 2008309. !tem3wise e%port of spices from !ndia is given in ppendi% 16.12

'%i#es Ex%or( 7ro) =erala

Economic Review 2010

111

16.'( 4*ring 2009310 e%port of spices thro*gh port in Herala stood at 696'6.8' tonnes val*ed at ` 14'68( la0hs. /hen compared to the previo*s year a deceleration of '.'0 percent in +*antity and a decrease of 0.9' percent in val*e is visible. @epper$ <ardomom$ chilli$ 6inger$ T*rmeric$ <orriander$ <*min$ <elery$ #ennel$ 6arlic$ Tamarind$ Ganila$ <*rry power$ -pice oil$ "int prod*cts$ 9*tmeg and "aces etc are the main items e%ported thro*gh the ports of Herala. 16.'8 !n the year *nder review Herala e%ported 16840.6' tonnes of pepper val*ed at ` 26(&4 la0hs as against a vol*me of 2&'2'.8' tonnes and an e%port val*e of ` &8'4&.29 la0hs in the previo*s year. Tho*gh a decline is seen when compared to the previo*s year Herala:s e%port of pepper represented 8' percent of !ndia:s e%port of pepper both in +*antity and val*e. !n the year *nder report e%port of cardomom increased to 16' percent$ <hilli increased to 1& percent$ 6inger 6 percent$ <*min increased to 1( percent$ #ennal increased to 21 percent$ #eng* gree0 increased to 18' percent$ garlic decreased to 28 percent$ -pice oil E 2lernes decreased to 2.( percent$ t*rmeric decreased by 0.( percent and coriander increased by 16.8 percent. !tem3wise e%port of spices thro*gh ports in Herala from 200'306 to 2009310 are f*rnished in ppendi% 16.1&

Tea
16.'9 6lobal Tea e%ports d*ring 2009 were estimated at 1'68.' " Hgs compared to 16'&.1 " Hgs. in the previo*s year showing a decrease of 84.6 " Hgs. @robably the decrease was d*e to the res*lt of the general macro economic trends in the world mar0et. !n the year *nder report e%port of Tea from !ndia increased to 21&.4& la0h Hgs. from 190.64 la0h Hg. in the previo*s year. !n val*e terms increased to ` &0&86.89 la0hs from ` 2&81(.9& la0h in the previo*s year. )%port of tea from 9orth !ndian$ -o*th !ndian @orts and ll !ndia are shown in table. 16.18

Box.1 lmost all the tea prod*cing co*ntries showed lower e%ports. !n Henya e%ports were lower by 40.9 "Hgs$ -ri ;an0a by 19 " Hgs$ !ndia 11.6 " Hgs$ Gietnam 9.6 " Hgs$ 5angladesh '.4 " Hgs$ TanIania &.& " Hgs. and !ndonesia &.2 " Hgs. Table.16.18 Ex%or( o7 Tea 7ro) Nor($ Indian and 'o<($ Indian Por(s
;ear 1 200'306 200630( 200(308 2008309 2009310 Nor($ Indian Por(s
A<an(i(5 ,=!/ Cal<e ,` ?a@$/

'o<($ Indian Por(s

A<an(i(5 ,=!/ Cal<e ,` .?a@$/

All India
A<an(i(5 ,=!/ Cal<e ` .?a@$/

E C$an!e oIer ($e %reIio<s 5ear

A<an(i(5 ,=!/ Cal<e ,` .?a@$/

* 100.'& 100.8( 110.1' 106.&0 122.'9

1 11601.41 122&2.04 12911.(( 1'609.60 2001&.'(

8 96.14 11(.28 ('.1( 84.&& 90.8'

9 6&&4.40 822'.14 '9('.0& 8208.&4 10&(&.&2

6 196.6( 218.1' 18'.&2 190.64 21&.4&

2 1(9&'.81 204'(.19 18886.80 2&81(.9& &0&86.89

3 3 10.92 =3? 1'.' 2.8( 11.9'

0 3 14.06 =3? (.68 26.10 2(.'8

#our e: Tea $oard

16.60 4*ring 2009310 e%port of Tea from <ochin @ort showed a declining trend. !n the year *nder report it decreased to &41.& la0h Hg from 4&'.2 la0h Hg. in previo*s year. !n val*e terms it

Economic Review 2010

118

decreased to ` 4'1&0.6 la0hs from ` 46(4(.8 la0h d*ring 2008309. Table 16.19 shows the e%port of tea thro*gh the <hochin @ort from 200'306 to 2009310. Table.16.19 Ex%or( o7 Tea 7ro) Co#$in Por(
;ear 200'306 200630( 200(308 2008309 2009310
#our e: Tea $oard

A<an(i(5 ,?a@$.=!/ 408.9 469.( 420.6 4&'.2 &41.&

Cal<e ,`.?a@$/ &1296.8 &8'28.9 &608&.& 46(4(.8 4'1&0.6

E C$an!e oIer ($e PreIio<s 5ear A<an(i(5 Cal<e ,?a@$.=!/ ,`.?a@$/ 3 3 14.8( 2&.11 =3? 10.4' =3? 6.&' &.4( 29.'6 =3? 21.'8 =3? &.46

Economic Review 2010