- Rice exports from Myanmar have exceeded 2 million tons per year since 2019-2020, except for 2020-2021 during the peak of the pandemic. Exports through seaports now account for around 80% of total exports. - Domestic rice prices in Myanmar have closely tracked Thai export prices, suggesting strong linkages between domestic and international markets. - Simulations of a 10% decrease in rice productivity and a 0.4 million ton increase in exports in 2022-2023 resulted in a 33% increase in domestic prices, a 5% fall in production, and a 10% drop in consumption, with poor households suffering the largest declines in rice consumption of 12-13%.

1. Photo Credit Goes Here
Photo Credit: michel arnault/Shutterstock
September 29, 2023
4:30 PM – 5:30 PM MMT
Paul Dorosh,
Director, Development Strategy and Governance Unit,
International Food Policy Research Institute
Nilar Aung,
Research Specialist,
Michigan State University
Shocks, Production, Exports and Market Prices:
An Analysis of the Rice Sector in Myanmar
We thank the Myanmar Rice Federation for providing data and other information on Myanmar’s rice exports.

2. SUMMARY
• Rice exports exceeded 2 mn tons/year each year since 2019-20, except for 2020-21 (the
peak of the pandemic).
• Trade across land borders (mainly to China and Thailand) accounted for over half of
exports each year from 2012-13 through 2017-18, but this trade fell to an average of
only 470K tons/year (21% of total trade) from 2019-20 to 2022-23.
• Domestic rice prices (Emata, wholesale Yangon) tracked Thai export prices measured at
prevailing market (kyat/USD) exchange rates (official rates or parallel market) suggesting
strong linkages with the international market
• Simulations of the rice market developments in 2022-23 (a 10 percent decrease in rice
productivity and a 0.4 million ton increase in rice exports) result in a 33 percent increase
in the domestic price, a 5 percent fall in rice production and a 10 percent drop in
consumption.
• Poor households suffer the largest declines in rice consumption – by 12 to 13
percent; rice consumption of the non-poor falls by 8 to 10 percent.

3. PLAN OF PRESENTATION
• Rice exports by source and by quality of rice
• Domestic and International (Border) Prices
• Partial Equilibrium Model of Myanmar’s Rice Sector
• Model Simulation Results
• Summary and Conclusions

4. Myanmar Rice Exports, 2008-09 to 2021-22*
Notes: All exports to Thailand across land borders are milled rice (not brokens).
Exports across land borders to China include both broken and non-broken rice.
Data from 2008-09 to 2017-18 is for April to March; data for 2018-19 to 2021-22 is for
October to September. Data shown for 2018 is April-September 2018.
Source: MRF (2023) data.
• Trade across land borders
(mainly to China and
Thailand) accounted for
over half of exports each
year from 2012-13 through
2017-18.
• Rice trade with China has
declined sharply since then,
however.
• From 2018-19 through 2021-
22, exports through seaports
accounted for 79% of
exports (an average of 1.8
mn tons out of a total of 2.3
mn tons per year).
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
(thousnad
tons)
Official (via Sea) Land Borders (China, Thailand)

5. Myanmar Rice Exports by Type of Rice (Apr 2022 - Feb 2023)
Notes: - A Grade (also called A 1:2) and B Grade (also called B 1:2) are 100 percent
broken, sold mainly for export to China and Europe. Both are well-milled Sortex rice; A
grade is polished rice, B grade is not polished. Domestic rice is typically a lower quality
than either A Grade or B Grade.
Source: MRSF (2023) data.
• The average price of all
exports in February 2023 was
$469 USD/ton, equal to
85.1% of the f.o.b. Bangkok
price of A1 rice.
• In 2022-23, A and B grade
rice accounted for 11% and
28% of the quantity of
exports, mainly traded across
land borders with China and
Thailand.
• The quality and price of
rice exports over land
borders was 11% to 17%
lower than exports by
sea (5% brokens).

6. Myanmar and Thai Rice Export Prices, 2009-23
• Myanmar’s export price
was on average 15
percent below Thailand’s
export price between
2013-14 and 2017-18,
though the gap widened
in 2018-19 and 2019-20.
• Average export prices of
Myanmar rice in 2020-21
were only 19 percent
below the average export
price for Thailand (fob, A1
grade), however.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
USD/MT
Exports-Sea Exports-PRC Exports-Ave FOB Bangkok (A1)
* Data from 2008-09 to 2017-18 is for April to March.
** Data for 2018 is April to September; all other years are October-September.
Source: IMF(2023), MRF(2023), World Bank (2023) and author's calculations.

7. Rice Prices in Myanmar and Thailand, 2013-2023
• The wholesale price of rice
in Yangon (Emata variety)
closely tracked export prices
of Thai A1 rice (converted to
kyat at the official exchange
rate) from 2014 through
2018, but the two series
diverged from 2019 through
mid-2021.
• Exports of some grades of
rice were still profitable,
however, as evidenced by
the large volume of trade
(especially over land borders
to China).
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
(Kyat/kg)
Emata wholesale Yangon Thai A1
Source: IMF(2023), MRF(2023), World Bank (2023) and author's calculations.

8. Real Rice Prices (2023 Kyat/kg), 2013-2023
• The average real (inflation-
adjusted) export price of A1
rice in Thailand from July
2014 to June 2021 was 821
(2023) Kyat/kg, 23 percent
higher than the average real
wholesale price of Emata
rice in Yangon (670 Kyat/kg).
• Between July 2021 and
January 2023, the real price
of rice (Emata wholesale,
Yangon) rose by 61%, while
Thailand’s price rose by
48%.
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
(2023
Kyat/kg)
Emata wholesale Yangon Thai A1

9. Real Rice Prices (2023 Kyat/kg), 2019-2023
• Domestic rice prices (Emata,
wholesale Yangon) tracked Thai
export prices measured at
official (kyat/USD) ex rates from
June 2020 to Oct 2021.
• From Nov 2021 to Jan 2023,
domestic prices more closely
tracked Thai prices measured
using weighted average ex
rates (65% official – 35%
parallel market). This average
reflects the share of forex (35%)
that exporters were allowed to
keep.
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
Jan-19 Jul-19 Jan-20 Jul-20 Jan-21 Jul-21 Jan-22 Jul-22 Jan-23
(2023
Kyat/kg)
Emata wholesale Yangon Thai A1
Coup. February 1, 2021

10. Real Rice Prices (2023 Kyat/kg), 2019-2023
• Domestic prices have been
consistently below Thai export
prices measured at parallel
market exchange rates.
• The large increase in domestic
prices in Feb 2023 reflects
lower domestic production, high
macro-inflation, and a loss of
competitiveness relative to Thai
rice at official ex rates.
• Nonetheless, rice exports
appear to remain profitable at
world prices converted to kyat
at the parallel exchange rate.
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
Jan-19 Jul-19 Jan-20 Jul-20 Jan-21 Jul-21 Jan-22 Jul-22 Jan-23
(2023
Kyat/kg)
Emata wholesale Yangon Thai A1
Thai A1 (par ExR) Thai A1 65:35 ExR
Coup. February 1, 2021

11. Myanmar Rice Model Equations
Production (1) Xi = X0i * xshocki * (Pi/P0i) ES
i
Domestic Supply (2) Si = Xi * (1 – lossi)
Household Income (3) Yh = Y0h * (1 + yshockh) + ( Pi * vai,h* Xi,h ) – ( P0i * va0i,h* X0i,h )
Demand (Consumption) (4) Dih = D0ih *(Pi/P0i) ED
i,h * (Yh/Y0h) EY
i,h
Equilibrium (5) Si = ∑h Dih + Ei
Variable names (0 denotes base level) Parameters
Di = demand (consumption) of commodity i (rice) EDi,h own-price elasticity of demand
Ei = exports EYi,h income elasticity of demand
Pi = domestic price of rice ESi own-price elasticity of supply
Si = total supply of rice xshocki exogenous production shock
Xi = total national production of rice vai,h value-added share of production
Yh = household income of household h

12. Myanmar Household Rice Demand Parameters
Source: Econometric estimates using data from the Myanmar Poverty and Living Conditions Survey, 2014/15. See
Comstock and Ecker 2023.
Own-Price Expenditure
Elasticity Elasticity
Urban poor -0.460 0.357
Urban nonpoor -0.348 0.246
Rural poor -0.674 0.504
Rural nonpoor -0.653 0.494
Myanmar average -0.599 0.449
• Own-price and
expenditure elasticities
for rice are higher for
poor households than for
non-poor households (i.e.
demand by non-poor
households is less
responsive to changes in
prices or incomes).
• Likewise, own-price and
expenditure elasticities of
demand are rural than for
urban households.

13. Supply, Demand and Exports
• Without external trade,
supply equals demand
when price is P0.
• At a border price of
P1, supply increases
to QS1 and demand
falls to QD1 resulting
in exports of QS1-
QD1.
S0
D0
Quantity
(tons)
EXP0
Price
(Kyat/kg)
P0
P1
QD1 QS1
Q0

14. Supply, Demand and Exports
S0
D0
Quantity
(tons)
EXP0
Price
(Kyat/kg)
P0
P1
P2
EXP1
QD1 QS’1
QS0
• If domestic supply is
reduced (due to poor
weather, lower labor
or fertilizer
availability, etc.)…
• the supply curve
shifts to S1,
• domestic supply falls
from QS1 to QS1’
• and exports fall to
EXP1.
S1
QS1

15. Supply, Demand and Exports
S0
D0
Quantity
(tons)
EXP0
Price
(Kyat/kg)
P0
P1
P2
EXP2
QD1 QS’1
QS0
• If domestic demand
also falls from D0 to
D1, exports increase
to EXP2, a total that
is a little less than
EXP0.
S1
D1
QS1
QD2

16. Supply, Demand and Exports
S0
D0
Quantity
(tons)
EXP0
Price
(Kyat/kg)
P0
P1
P2 EXP2
QD1 QS1
Q0
• If, in addition to the
shifts in the supply
and demand curves,
the world price rises
to P2, then the new
level of exports
(EXP3) is equal to
the original level of
exports (EXP0).
S1
D1
EXP3
QD3 QS3

17. Source: Model simulations.
• Sim 1: 20% and 10% reductions
in urban and rural household
incomes, respectively, along
with a 10% decline in rice
production, leads to a 65K ton
reduction in rice exports.
• Sim 2: A 20% increased in world
rice prices leads to a 460K ton
increase (3.7%) in rice
production and a 1.1 mn ton
(45.7%) increase in exports.
• Combining Sim 1 and Sim 2,
exports increase by 370K tons
(15.4%) relative to the base.
Impacts of Lower Incomes and
Higher World Prices on Rice Production and Exports
-1.50
-1.00
-0.50
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
Production Exports Consumption
(mn
tons)
Lower HH Incomes World Rice Price +20% Sim1+Sim2

18. Impacts of Lower Incomes and
Higher World Rice Prices on Rice Consumption
Source: Model simulations.
• Sim 1: 20% lower household
incomes result in a 7.7%
reduction in rice consumption
for the urban poor and a 5.3%
reduction for urban nonpoor.
• Sim 2: 20% higher rice prices
reduce rice consumption of the
urban poor by 8.1% and by
9.2% for the urban nonpoor.
• Sim 3: Lower incomes with
higher rice prices lead to a
15.1% reduction in rice
consumption for the urban poor
and a 10.9% reduction for the
urban nonpoor.
-16.0%
-14.0%
-12.0%
-10.0%
-8.0%
-6.0%
-4.0%
-2.0%
0.0%
Urban Poor Urban Nonpoor Rural Poor Rural Nonpoor
Lower HH Incomes World Rice Price +20% Sim1+Sim2

19. Impacts of Lower Productivity and Increased Export
Demand on Production and Exports
Source: Model simulations.
• Sim 4: If rice exports to PR
China (0.8 mn tons in the
base) fall to zero, but 1.6 mn
tons of exports of higher
quality rice continue, domestic
prices of rice fall by 14.6%.
• Production falls by 3.1%,
but consumption
increases by 5.0%.
• Sim 5: A 10% decrease in rice
productivity leads to a 1.3 mn
ton decrease in output and a
1.0 mn ton (41.8%) decrease
in exports.
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
10%
20%
Production Exports Consumption
Sim 4: Rice Exports to PRC = 0 Sim 5: Rice Productivity -10% Sim 6: 2023

20. Impacts of Lower Productivity and Increased Export
Demand on Production and Exports (cont.)
Source: Model simulations.
• Sim 6: If, in addition to a
10.0% decrease in rice
productivity, rice exports
increase by 0.41 mn tons
(17.1%), then domestic prices
rise by 27.9%, rice production
decreases by 5.5% and
consumption falls by 11.3%.
• Note: the 10.0% decrease in
production and the 0.41 mn
ton increase in exports are
equal to the actual changes
between 2022 and 2023.
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
10%
20%
Production Exports Consumption
Sim 4: Rice Exports to PRC = 0 Sim 5: Rice Productivity -10% Sim 6: 2023

21. Impacts of Lower Productivity and Increased Export
Demand on Rice Consumption
Source: Model simulations.
• Sim 4: Lower total demand for
exports increases rice availability,
reduces domestic rice prices and
leads to a 7.3 to 7.5% increase in
rice consumption for poor
households, but only a 2.2%
increase for rural nonpoor
households whose incomes from
rice production decline.
• Sim 5: With domestic prices tied
to world prices, simulated
decreases in rice productivity do
not directly affect urban incomes
or consumption, but rural
consumption falls by 1 to 2%.
-15.0%
-10.0%
-5.0%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
Urban Poor Urban Nonpoor Rural Poor Rural Nonpoor
Sim 4: Rice Exports to PRC = 0 Sim 5: Rice Productivity -10% S-2023

22. Impacts of Lower Productivity and Increased Export
Demand on Rice Consumption
Source: Model simulations.
• Sim 6: The combined effect
of a 10 percent decrease in
rice productivity, a 0.41 mn
ton increase in rice exports
(and a 33% increase in
prices) is to reduce total rice
consumption by 11.3 (10.7
and 13.4% for the urban and
rural poor, respectively, and
by 8.2 and 10.8%,
respectively, for the urban
and rural non-poor.
-15.0%
-10.0%
-5.0%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
Urban Poor Urban Nonpoor Rural Poor Rural Nonpoor
Sim 4: Rice Exports to PRC = 0 Sim 5: Rice Productivity -10% S-2023

23. SUMMARY
• Rice exports exceeded 2 mn tons/year each year since 2019-20, except for 2020-21 (the
peak of the pandemic).
• Trade across land borders (mainly to China and Thailand) accounted for over half of
exports each year from 2012-13 through 2017-18, but this trade fell to an average of
only 470K tons/year (21% of total trade) from 2019-20 to 2022-23.
• Domestic rice prices (Emata, wholesale Yangon) tracked Thai export prices measured at
prevailing market (kyat/USD) exchange rates (official rates or parallel market) suggesting
strong linkages with the international market
• Simulations of the rice market developments in 2023-24 (a 10 percent decrease in rice
productivity and a 0.4 million ton increase in rice exports) result in a 33 percent increase
in the domestic price, a 5 percent fall in rice production and a 10 percent drop in
consumption.
• Poor households suffer the largest declines in rice consumption – by 12 to 13
percent; rice consumption of the non-poor falls by 8 to 10 percent.

24. REFERENCES
Coady, David, Paul Dorosh and Bart Minten. 2009. “Evaluating Alternative Policy Responses to Higher World Food Prices:
The Case of Increasing Rice Prices in Madagascar”, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 91(3) (August
2009): 711-722.
Dorosh, Paul A. 2001. “Trade Liberalization and National Food Security: Rice Trade between Bangladesh and India”,
World Development, 29(4): 673-689.
Dorosh, Paul, Myat Thida Win Joanna van Asselt. 2019. “Production Shocks, Exports and Market Prices: An Analysis of
the Rice Sector in Myanmar”, IFPRI Discussion Paper 01830. Washington, D.C.: IFPRI.
Ecker, O., and A.R. Comstock. 2023. “Income and Price Elasticities of Food Demand (E-FooD) Dataset”, Version 1.0.
Harvard Dataverse. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/OXZ0H6.
Ecker, Olivier, and Andrew R. Comstock. 2021. Income and Price Elasticities of Food Demand (E-FooD) Dataset:
Documentation of Estimation Methodology. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute. IFPRI
Data Paper: https://doi.org/10.2499/p15738coll2.134675
Schmidt, Emily, Paul Dorosh and Rachel Gilbert. 2021. "Impacts of COVID-19 related income and rice price shocks on
household welfare in Papua New Guinea", Agricultural Economics 52(3):391-
406. https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12625
World Bank (2021). Myanmar Poverty and Living Conditions Survey, 2014/15. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
https://doi.org/10.48529/tyd0-f528

25. ေကျးဇူးတင်ပါတယ်
Thank you

26. www.feedthefuture.gov