Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Consumer Price Movement: Implications for Welfare by Sohail Malik, Innovative Development Strategies Ltd
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Consumer Price Movement: Implications for Welfare by Sohail Malik, Innovative Development Strategies Ltd

303
views

Published on

Presentations made at the PSSP First Annual Conference - December 13, 14, 2012 - Planning Commission, Islamabad, Pakistan

Presentations made at the PSSP First Annual Conference - December 13, 14, 2012 - Planning Commission, Islamabad, Pakistan


0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
303
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Consumer Price Movements – Implications for Welfare Sohail Jehangir Malik Chairman Innovative Development Strategies (Pvt.) Ltd. With thanks to Amna, Asma, Asjad, Hina and Wajiha Pakistan Strategy Support Program Annual Conference December 13, 2012
  • 2. Pakistan Today: An Economy in Crisis Terrorism Political Unrest Poor Economic Management ◦ growing deficit, rising prices, increasing unemployment Energy Crisis Shutdowns and Rising Unemployment Natural Disasters Serious Economic Downturn
  • 3. Increasing Unemployment, Underemployment and Rising.Prices resulting in loss of welfare Ability to Accurately Measure Consumer Price Movements inEssential for Effective Economic Policy Making
  • 4. The Consumer Price Index is used for:• the indexation of – wages – rents – contract payments – social security payments• the deflation of household consumption in the national accounts• macroeconomic indicator: – especially for inflation targeting and managing money supply – setting interest rates – Establishing Purchasing Power Parity etc. etc.
  • 5. Most Importantly It has been usedby the Government in Extrapolating the Poverty Line to estimate the Incidence of Poverty
  • 6. This also makes the CPI a highly politically sensitive measure
  • 7. Trends in Monthly CPI (July 2008 to April 2012) 180 170 168 160 CPI (2007-08=100) 150 56 point 140 112 increase since Jul 08 130 120 110 100 Sep-08 Sep-09 Sep-10 Sep-11 Mar-09 Mar-10 Mar-11 Mar-12 Jul-08 Jan-09 May-09 Jul-09 Jan-10 May-10 Jul-10 Jan-11 May-11 Jul-11 Jan-12 Nov-08 Nov-09 Nov-10 Nov-11Source: Pakistan Bureau of Statistics (various issues)
  • 8. Real Wages of Skilled and Unskilled Workers 400 Mason 350 Unskilled worker 300 250 Rs/day 200 150 100 50 0 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011Source: Pakistan Economic Survey 2010-11
  • 9. Real household consumption expenditure in Pakistan remained more or less stagnant or declined 18,000 16,000 Nominal 14,000 Real 12,000Rs per month 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 - 2001-02 2004-05 2005-06 2007-08 2010-11 2012Source: HIES (various issues), PRHS for 2012For real expenditure (2000-01=100)
  • 10. Source: Government of Pakistan Economic Survey 2011-12
  • 11. Changes to the CPI Methodology in 2011-12 CPI rebased from 2000-01 to 2007-08• Basket of commodities increased from 374 to 487 items• Commodity groups from 10 to 12.• Coverage of cities increased from 35 to 40• Food group weight reduced from 40.3 percent to 34.8 percent• 21 items in the old basket dropped• 111 new items have been added
  • 12. Elements of Change of Base Year 2000-01 to 2007-08• Revision to commodity groups• Weights derived from Family Budget Survey 2007-08• Coverage of items to capture the changing pattern of consumption of the people.
  • 13. Family Budget Surveys of Pakistan• Last one conducted in 2007-08 next one due this year – 54,309 households – 65 cities. – 487 commodities• In addition recorded: – prices from 40 urban centers – 1 to 13 markets surveyed in each – four quotations in each market• “markets are selected on the basis of the volume of sales, assuming that majority of the consumers buy goods from these markets”. Price data collected on monthly basis according to a predetermined time schedule.• Survey is Urban• Sampling Frame, Coverage, Questionnaire NOT available in Public Domain
  • 14. Theoretically: four categories of biases are possible• Substitution bias occurs because a fixed market basket fails to reflect the fact that consumers substitute relatively less for more expensive goods when relative prices change.• Outlet substitution bias occurs when shifts to lower price outlets are not properly handled.• Quality change bias occurs when improvements in the quality of products, such as greater energy efficiency or less need for repair, are measured inaccurately or not at all.• New product bias occurs when new products are not introduced in the market basket, or included only with a long lag.Source: Boskin Commission, 1996
  • 15. Expenditure Shares – Family Budget Survey and Household Income Expenditure Survey 2007 - 08 60 50 Percentage (%) 40 30 20 10 0 Transpor Commun Educatio Miscella Food Clothing Housing Health t ication n neousFamily Budget Survey 34.83 7.57 29.41 2.19 7.2 3.22 3.94 2.76HIES Pakistan 43.61 6.62 23.61 3.69 8.26 2.21 2.33 2.63HIES Urban 36.82 5.87 28.86 3.12 8.34 2.66 3.32 2.82HIES Rural 50.6 7.38 18.2 4.27 8.19 1.75 1.3 2.43
  • 16. The Family Budget Survey Underestimates the share of FoodExpenditures by nearly 9 percentage points
  • 17. Further - Survey data indicate the average share of food expenditure in household consumptionexpenditure shows a sharp increase since 2007-08 58 56 54 52 % share 50 48 46 44 42 2004-05 2005-06 2007-08 2010-11 2012Source: HIES (various issues), RHPS for 2012
  • 18. This Biases the CPI downwards since Food Prices historically haverisen more sharply than other prices andremember also that the poor spend a higher proportion of their expenditures on food.
  • 19. Changes in General and Food Price Indices 100 90Year over Year Change (%) 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2006-07 2007-08 to 2007- to 2008- to 2009- to 2010- to 2010- to 2010- 08 09 10 11 11 11 General 12 20.8 11.7 13.9 72.2 53.7 Food 17.6 23.7 12.5 18 93.1 64.1
  • 20. Trends in CPI and FPI 180 160 140 120 100Index 80 60 40 20 0 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 General 89.3 100 120.8 134.9 153.7 Food 85 100 123.7 139.1 164.1
  • 21. Detailed Statistical Tests based on the HIES 2010 2011 Data Indicate Significant Differences in Prices within and across rural and urban areasThe CPI Methodology does NOT cover Rural Areas
  • 22. Rural Urban Prices Differences (Rs per Kilogram) – HIES 2010-11 Urban Rural t-test Wheat and Wheat f 29.8 28.5 21.78* Rice and Rice flour 63.7 58.8 17.21* Milk 49.4 44.6 29.88* Yogurt 59 49.8 28.09* Cooking oil 150.6 153.5 -4.17* Beef 234.7 222.5 12.86* Mutton 409.4 394.7 5.35* Potatoes 26.8 27.5 -4.37* Onion 32.8 34.4 -5.99* Banana 32.1 30.8 4.80* Sugar 74.3 76.5 -14.29*
  • 23. The Economic Survey 2011-12 recognizes the importance of food prices – some quotes • “Food carries the largest weight and hence influences the movement of the indices with a slight variation in prices” • “The most visible impact of rising food prices on economy is acceleration of inflationary pressure – In such a situation controlling the inflation becomes unmanageable” • “We are experiencing double-digit inflation over the last several years mainly due to increase in prices of food”. • And yet the CPI understates the weight of food expenditures and does NOT cover the rural areas where the share of food expenditures is higher
  • 24. Changes in Key Commodity Prices 180 160 140Percentage Change 120 100 80 60 40 20(%) 0 -20 -40 Wheat Moong Red Fresh Sugar General Food flour pulse chillies milk 2006-07 to 2007-08 32.5 -6.8 56.2 -12.3 14 12 17.6 2007-08 to 2008-09 41.9 -4.9 -1.7 38.7 20.3 20.8 23.7 2008-09 to 2009-10 12.2 55.7 4.9 47.5 15.6 11.7 12.5 2009-10 to 2010-11 2.7 74.9 51.1 27.3 18.4 13.9 18 2006-07 to 2010-11 116.7 141.4 143.3 128.3 87.5 72.2 93.1 2007-08 to 2010-11 63.6 159.1 55.8 160.5 64.5 53.7 64.1
  • 25. Food Prices are critical for Food Security, hunger and poverty
  • 26. Food price inflation is the mostregressive of all taxes—it hurts the poor the most.
  • 27. Asian Bank 2008 simulation estimates for Pakistan……….• 10% increase in food prices = additional 7.05 million poor people 20% increase in food prices = 14.67 million additional poor people• 30% increase in food prices = 21.96 million poor people
  • 28. Nearly half the Population of Pakistan wasdeclared Food Insecure in 2008 after the foodprice hike!!!“Currently 77 million people, almost half thepopulation, is food insecure in Pakistan - dailycalorie intake below the minimum recommendedlevel”-Report of the Prime Minister’s Task Force on Food Security (2008)The situation in 2011 is more urgentPakistan is amongst the 26 countries havingserious/alarming levels of hunger (2011 GHI -IFPRI)
  • 29. “Food policy dilemma” - promoting high prices for producers or low prices for consumers?• Market interventions are not costless – and can result in substantial government subsidies and efficiency losses• There is a mismatch between objectives (producer and consumer price levels and stability, availability of grain for distribution programs, minimum stock levels, etc.) and policy instruments (procurement and sales prices, levels of government imports, etc.)
  • 30. Wheat is central to Food Security in Pakistan• Wheat accounts for over 55 percent of total caloric consumption• Poor households spend 24 percent of food expenditure on wheat• 26 percent of total households produce wheat and 97 percent households consume wheat.• Among the wheat producers – 21.6 percent are the net buyers – 18 percent are the net seller of wheat• An increase in wheat price benefits only the net sellers of wheatSource: HIES 2010-11
  • 31. Careful, Unbiased and Accurate recording and reporting of consumer price movements is essential for ensuring policies topromote the welfare of the people
  • 32. Recommendations• Revise and update the methodology for Constructing the CPI to – Reflect the actual (higher) weights of the Food Expenditures – Reflect the Rural Sector weights and prices• HIES Categories are not according to the classification of individual consumption according to purpose (COICOP) – which is followed by the Family Budget Surveys – make these consistent• Test for and continuously remove the potential biases that can exist in calculating the CPI
  • 33. Key References• GOP (2012). Methodology of price collection and computing price indices. Pakistan Bureau of Statistics. March 2012. http://www.pbs.gov.pk/content/methodology-0• Government of India (2010). Manual on Consumer Price Index 2010. Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation. Central Statistics Office, New Delhi. www.mospi.gov.in• Government of Pakistan (2012). Economic Survey 2010-12. Ministry of Finance. Islamabad.• Pakistan Bureau of Statistics (2007-08). Household Integrated Economic Survey 2007-08.• UN (2009). Practical guide to producing Consumer Prices Indices. ECE/CES/STAT/NONE/2009/2. www.unece.org/stats/publications/Practical_Guide_to_Producing_CPI .pdf•