You are on page 1of 19

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