This document provides an analysis of the beef markets in Malaysia focusing on imports from Australia and India. It begins with an introduction to Malaysia's economy and beef consumption trends. The main ethnic groups in Malaysia and their beef preferences are outlined. It then analyzes Australian beef imports, including trends over time and the impact of issues obtaining halal certification. Indian beef imports are also examined, noting India's dominance as a supplier and factors like halal compliance driving demand. The analysis concludes beef demand in Malaysia is rising with incomes and consumption patterns shifting toward meat.

1. Economic for Managers
The analysis of beef market (Australian and Indian beef) in
Malaysia
SEGi University

2. 2013
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction……………………………………………………………………3
1.1.
Malaysia’s economy overview…………………………………………3
1.2.
Limitation………………………………………………………………3
1.3.
Distribution of beef by ethnics…………………………………………3
2. Australian beef import analysis ………………………………………………6
2.1.
Australian beef import to Malaysia…………………………….…….…6
2.2.
Theory of comparison of close to competitive market and
monopolistic competition………………………………………………….8
2.3.
Analysis of Australian beef in Malaysian market……………….……..8
3. Indian beef import analysis……………………………………………….…..11
4. Analysis/Conclusion……….………………………………………….………15
5. References…………………………………………………….………………17
2

3. 1.
Introduction
1.1.
Malaysia’s economic overview. Malaysia is a multicultural country, where main
ethnic groups are Malay, Chinese and Indian. The Malaysian economy faced rapid economic
growth for the period of last decades and expected to grow at faster rate of 4,5% to 5,5% in
2013. Income per capita increased from $9693 in 2011 to $ 9755 in 2012 (Prime Minister’s
Department Malaysia, 2012,). Due to fact, that Malaysia’s population growing constantly, that
makes food consumption increases as well. Statistically, per capita consumption of beef
increased from 2,3 kg to 5,8 kg within 1961-2003 (Tey Y.S., 2008).
1.2.
Limitation. Malaysia has limited domestic agricultural production and increasing
demand for many products, especially food products. For this reason import has been a major
source for Malaysia’s food supply. This aspect provides opportunities for both Australian and
Indian beef importers.
The beef industry is small in Malaysia. There are some reasons for that, such as humid
climate that is unfavorable for beef production, thus limited farm lands are another reason. In
fact, it is problematic to achieve productivity and economies of scale, plus to compete with beef
importers.
1.3.
Distribution of beef by ethnics. Expenditure elasticities for meat, fish, vegetables
and fruits are 1.11, 0.910, 1.341 and vegetables respectively (Tey Y.S., 2009). These elasticities
show that Malaysian consumers tend to consume more meat as income rises. Thus, as more
3

4. people get more they eat beef. According to Table 1 Malay consumers buy more beef than other
ethnic groups. Because of religion issue and belief, small amount of people from Chinese and
Indian ethnic groups buy beef. Thus, most consumers are Malay people from rural regions.
Table 1. Percentage distribution of ethnics in Malaysia
Lower-income group
Higher-income group
Total
Rural
Urban
Rural
Urban
Rural
Urban
Malay
72
56
68
40
72
49
Chinese
8
19
18
44
9
29
Indian
3
7
3
7
3
7
Others
17
18
11
9
16
15
Malaysia is a country which is wealthy in culture, race, character and diversity. With each
race that is known to reside in Malaysia, it has its own individuality, culture and festivity.
Malaysia is truly a diverse country which commonly known for its rich celebration for each one
of the main races. Celebrations that take place are brought together from Chinese, Malay and
Indian. The culture of Malaysia is drawn from the varied culture of each of these main races in
Malaysia. As they are called Malaysians, each one this races celebrates their own unique
festivities. Malaysians belong to three ethnic groupings, 50 percent of the total population that
resides in Malaysia are Malays, a quarter is Chinese and other part of the population is Indians.
Each of these ethnic groupings has their own preferences in food consumption. Majorly, Malays
are Muslims and thus are not allowed to eat non-halal food items and food that is consumed must
be done through the Islamic teachings. Chinese are more dynamic in terms of consumption, as
their religion is more diverse thusly affecting their diet. While Indian cuisine are vastly
consumed with meat, spices and bread. But there are still some religion aspects that prohibit
Indian from consuming beef.
Because of economic stability, different religions and celebrations consumption of beef
increases constantly. During the time of celebration, supply and demand of beef is affected as the
demand for beef is increased for celebrations (Eid al-Adha which is celebrated by Muslims). In
this occasion or some other celebration that is celebrated by other ethnic groupings, the festive
season in Malaysia has an effect in sales for beef. Celebrations like Chinese New Year, Aidilfitri
4

5. or Aidiladha, has caused firms to supply more for buyers to purchase more to celebrate the
joyous occasion. With the generous population of Malaysia that consists of three main ethnicity,
the demand for beef is great but because of the lack of supplies, beef that is consumed by the
local Malaysians are mostly imported from Australia and India. 2 of these countries are
Malaysian's biggest suppliers in agricultural goods. One of the goods will be beef. The increase
of population and the economic stability in Malaysia has caused the demand for beef to increase.
Malaysia's food self-sufficiency rates are very low for agricultural goods thus it demands for a
separated supplier of this particular goods to be imported in to meet the buyer’s demands. With 2
countries supplying Malaysian's needs for beef, India holds the highest supplier in Malaysia and
seconded by Australian import. These details will be discussed in the ongoing chapter. With
rising incomes, food consumption has shifted away from starchy staples and moved toward
wheat and livestock products, seafood, fruit and vegetables (Mitchell, 1997).
Consequently, demand for beef is determined by total meat expenditure, beef price, price
of other meat products and socio-cultural process. The purpose of this assignment to analyze
price differences and reasons for that between Australian and Indian exporters of beef to
Malaysia.
5

6. 2.
Australian beef
2.1.
Australian beef import to Malaysia. With rapid income and population growth,
food consumption in Malaysia has shifted away from starchy staples and become more varied
with the inclusion of greater quantities of wheat-based products, meat, dairy products, seafood,
6

7. fruit and vegetables. Because of Malaysia’s limited domestic agricultural production and a
growing demand for many products (such as wheat-based products, livestock and dairy products,
sugar and vegetables), imports have been a major source of Malaysia’s food supply. This
provides market opportunities for Australia’s agricultural export industries. Australia is the
leading agricultural exporter to Malaysia.
Malaysia’s key imports from Australia are wheat (valued at US$198 million in 2006),
sugar (US$178 million) and dairy products (US$112 million). Others include wool, live cattle,
vegetables, sheep meat, beef and fruits. The food processing industry in Malaysia is growing,
with many intermediate inputs being imported. The Malaysian government plans to develop its
food processing industry with a particular emphasis on halal food products, which have the
potential to expand into international markets.
This also provides an opportunity for Australian exporters to cooperate with the
Malaysian food processing industry. Despite some very high bound tariffs, applied tariffs on
agricultural products in Malaysia are mostly low or zero. However, non-tariff protocols constrain
Australian exports to Malaysia, including the requirement to obtain halal meat approval and the
allocation of import licenses for some agricultural commodities such as sugar and milk. In
Malaysia, despite some recent reforms, a range of products continue to be subjected to price
controls. These include sugar and wheat products. Unless significant pressures on domestic
prices emerge, imports will not be allowed to increase. This also constrains Australia’s exports
of these commodities to Malaysia. Freer domestic trade practices and elimination of price
controls might improve Australia’s prospects in exporting more commodities to Malaysia.
Production in the agricultural sector is dominated by palm oil, rubber and forestry products.
Other major agricultural production includes rice, poultry, fruits and vegetables. Because of
relatively limited supply and rising demand of meat, wheat and dairy products, imports have
been a major source of Malaysia's food supply. Meat is one of the leading exports that Australia
trades with Malaysia. It is accounted for almost 60 percent of the total meat export from
Australia. History of agricultural trade between these two countries was made back in previous
years, where Australian beef export to Malaysia has become an increasing trend.
7

8. Figure 1. Australian beef exports to Malaysia
Using the diagram from Figure 1, it is shows the quantity and years of beef export from
Australia to Malaysia. Figure shown are in tonnes and the longevity of the export is from the
year 1995 until the forecast of 2012. Throughout the years from 1995 to 2002, the average
amount of tonnes that is exported is 6,000 tonnes. The supply and demand for beef is balanced
throughout these years but it is shown there is an enormous drop in supply from 2005 till 2006.
These figures shown the tonnes that were exported go as low as 2,000 tonnes in 2006. The
amount export started to change in 2007 and dramatically increases throughout the years until
the forecast of 2012.
Decrease in import of beef from 2005 till 2006 is significant and has raised and alarming
decrease of supply of beef in Malaysia. Beef imports from Australia is a source of raw food
materials that is used for its high quality and demands that is which a criteria must meet for any
high-end food outlets and restaurants (Chang, 2006). The second largest supplier for beef
exports, Australia was affected by suspension of the halal accreditation for all but one abattoir
(MLA, 2005). The suspension has caused for the numbers of exports from Australia to dwindle
from 2005 to 2006 as beef exports were down by 10 percent year on year in 2006 (MLA, 2006).
22 Australian abattoirs and plants were approved by Malaysian Department of Veterinary
Services on December 2007.
8

9. The demand for importing beef from Australia to Malaysia has shown the economic
stability in Malaysia. Demand for beef rises throughout the years as forecast shows it will rise to
even more higher number 15,000 tonnes (Figure 1) in 2012 as it is forecasted. Increase in
population and the amount of disposable income for buyers has increased the supply and demand
for Australian beef on looking for quality assured products.
2.2.
Theory of comparison of close to competitive market and monopolistic
competition
In this report, we choice to compare between monopolistic competition and close to
perfect competition market in terms of its characteristics, price and output, long-run equilibrium
and efficiency. There are large numbers of sellers selling homogenous products in close to a
close perfect competition market. But in monopoly competition market, each firm has its own
price policy. Close to Perfect competitive firms are price takers while a monopolist is price
maker. A close to perfect competitive firm faces a horizontal demand curve, whereas a
monopolistic competitive firm faces a downward sloping demand curve. A close to perfect
competitive firm earns a normal profit in the long run due to free entry and exit. However, a
monopolistic competition firm, the demand curve is downward sloping and MR curve is also
downward sloping, which lies below the average revenue curve. In the long run, perfect
competitive firm produces at the lowest point on the minimum of average cost, is more efficient
and the firm’s price is equal to MC (Daviga, 2008).
2.3.
Analysis of Australian beef in Malaysian market
We had looked at how the equilibrium price is determined in Kuala Lumpur markets.
Before us analysis our report further, let us indicate what is the pattern between firm and beef
industry. A firm is a single unit producing goods and services. An Australia beef industries is a
group of firms producing identical goods. In this assignment, we had reported that the
intersection of demand and supply curves gives the equilibrium price and quantity. This concept
applies to the beef industry in the perfect competitive firm. The equilibrium price is decided at
the value where Malaysian market’s demand for and Australian beef industry’s supply of all
industry is equilibrium. The intersection of demand and supply curves gives the equilibrium cost
for the beef industry market. Figure 1 indicates how an individual beef market determines the
9

10. price of Australian beef. In figure 1, the quantity demanded and quantity supplied is shown on
X-axis and price of the good is shown on Y-axis. DD and SS indicate the demand curve and
supply curve intersect each other. The equilibrium price is at RM38.2 per kg of beef. This is the
price determined by industry.
Figure 2. Price determination in a close to perfect competitive beef market
Figure 3. Price determinations in a close to perfect competitive beef firm
Figure 2 and 3 illustrate how an Australian beef firm in close to perfect competition
market determines the price of Australian beef. In Figure 1, the price is determined by the
intersection of an Australian beef market supply curve and the market demand curve in
Malaysia. The Australian beef firm will sell at the equilibrium price of RM 38.2 per kg of
Australian beef as shown in Figure 3. Since the firms are price takers, they face a horizontal
10

11. demand curve. All individual firms in close to perfect competition market face a perfectly elastic
or horizontal demand curve. All individual firms in perfect competition market face a perfectly
elastic or horizontal demand curve. As a price taker, close to perfect competitive firm, Australian
meat firm will taker the market price of RM 38.2 per kg of Australian meat and sell any amount
at this price. At to the price of RM38.2, the average revenue (AR) curve of the firm will be
horizontal to the X-axis and also the marginal revenue (MR) curve. What we reported in this
assignment. If the price is constant, AR is equal to MR. Demand curve in close to perfect
competition is horizontal or perfectly elastic as shown in Figure 3. Only close to perfect
competitive firm faces a horizontal demand curve compared to other types of market structure.
We have understood why the close perfect competitive firms faces horizontal demand curve.
Now, we have examined how the industry and firm in close perfect competitive form maximize
their profits. Every firm’s objective is to achieve the highest or maximum profit. In same level,
the firm might earn profit but that is not the maximum. So, the maximum profit is earned when
the cost is at the lowest. We have understood one of the conditions in a close to perfect
competition market is that the firm must sell standardized or homogenous products. The buyers
do not differentiate the products of one seller to another seller. For example, the buyers cannot
charge different prices for the same product in the market. If the buyers can notice the difference
in terms of quality, packaging, colour or design of different seller’s then the market is not a close
to perfect competition market (Daviga, 2008).
11

12. 3.
Indian beef
India is a largest importer of beef in Malaysia with 81% of market share in 2011. Indian
buffalo meat is traditionally sold through retail, with a smaller proportion in foodservice (The
Cattle Site, 2011). The overall estimated production of meat was 6.5 million tones during 20072008 while in recognized sector it was only 2.6 million tones (Halal in India, 2010). Most
number of buffalo meat exports overseas because there is no demand in domestic market.
On the demand side of the equation, the rapid expansion of Indian beef shipments has
been met by robust demand for lean and low priced beef, largely across the Middle East, Africa
and southern Asia. In 2013, Indian beef production is tipped to reach 4.17 million tons cwt,
compared to 11.27 million tons cwt in the US, which has a herd of around 90 million head.
From an Australian perspective, while Indian beef does not have access to major markets,
including Japan, Korea and the US, there are several smaller markets where Australian and
Indian beef competes.
Demand of Indian Meat is expanding in overseas market especially increasing demand of
buffalo’s meat in gulf and south eastern countries due to its lean character and it's near organic
nature. Using of Halal method in slaughter of animals is an significant matter for the consumers
from Muslim world, therefore, prior to granting the registration certificate to abattoirs /meat
processing plants, it is mandatory to disclose the method of slaughter whether Halal method for
slaughter of animals practiced properly and record about number of animals slaughtered kept by
the representatives of the Islamic organization also. Due to certainty of Halal compliance, India
is favorite destination to import the meat Muslim countries due to its hygiene and Halal nature.
Malaysia’s total beef imports worldwide last year stood at 107,840 tonnes, out of which
10% was from Australia. In 2004, it was 121,221 tonnes. Generally, Malaysians consume five to
six kg of beef and two to three kg of mutton per person per year compared with 35-36 kg of beef
and some 20-plus kg of mutton by Australians. The consumption of these food items is expected
to surge despite the unfounded belief that they are not healthy food.
12

13. The Malaysian diet has undergone significant changes over the years. The diet change is
characterized by a dramatic diminished consumption of rice and preference for higher-value and
protein livestock products. Statistically, per capita consumption of rice has decreased from
121 kg in 1961 to 70.8 kg in 2003 while per capita consumption of meat has increased from 13.2
kg in 1961 to 48.5 kg in 2003 (FAO, 2007). With rising income, it is projected that Malaysian
consumers will further diversify their diets with more livestock products in their food basket
(Ishida, 2003). Typically, economists attribute such dietary diversification to income, prices, and
urbanization changes. A change in the degree of government participation has brought a rapid
development in the domestic agri-food systems. In the Ninth Malaysian Plan, the Malaysian
government targets to increase the production of beef and mutton in order to reduce the
dependence on imports. As per capita consumption (0.5 kg in 2003) of mutton is very low, more
attention is paid to the beef market. Statistically, per capita consumption of beef increased from
2.3 kg to 5.8 kg within 1961-2003 (FAO, 2007). Due to the all-time high price of beef that is
controlled by a cartel, the government also plans to open the beef market to more foreign
producers, particularly halal abattoirs. Both initiatives are expected to make beef products more
affordable and bring a significant change in the quantity of beef purchase and consumption.
Recent previous studies (Ishida, 2003) focused more on Malaysians’ demand for aggregate meat
in Malaysia. Specifically, early previous studies (Baharumshah, 1993) estimated expenditure
elasticities for individual meat products. Baharumshah (1993) reported expenditure elasticities of
0.992, 0.061, and 0.86 for beef and 1.292, 1.432, and 0.88 for poultry, respectively. They
suggested that Malaysian consumers are likely to increase more of their poultry consumption
compared to beef in response to income growth.
According to above mentioned information it is clear that consumer demand for beef has
changed because consumers derive utility (satisfaction) from the quality characteristics of beef.
This, in simple terms, is the result of a comparison between the real and the desired
characteristics. Utility appraisal is critical to determine a consumer’s decision to repurchase the
beef. Anderson and Ferguson (2001) pointed out that consumers emphasize quality as the top
priority in making a decision to purchase beef. Though quality attribute is increasingly critical as
a selling point, Capps and Schmitz (1991) found that consumers are more likely to favor quantity
over quality. The domestic beef market is also postulated to be characterized by a variety of
qualities in future. This assumption is made on the basis that consumers do not only make
decisions on how much to purchase but also on quality. Hsu (2001) recognized that the demand
for product quality is increasingly important as a component in food purchase process. Hence, it
13

14. is important for beef producers and traders to gain a better understanding on consumers’
preference to offer desirable beef products.
Malaysia imported about 100,000 tones of Indian beef in 2006, which is 36% more
compare in 2002. Beef that is imported to Malaysia is relatively cheap because of low quality
(the average price is RM13 per kg). One of the main advantages of Indian beef is health status.
India has been free from Mad Cow Disease. Another reason is lean character and it’s near
organic nature. Because of Halal compliance, India is favorite to import to Malaysia.
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
'000 tones
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
Figure 4. Malaysia beef imports from India
According to Figure 4, it is clear that Indian beef imports from 1995 until 1999 slightly
increased, but afterwards we see constant and rapid growth in quantity of beef. The main reason
for that is the issue of low cost of the beef. Due to the fact that majority of population are
Malays, who are mainly muslims and eat only halal-food, the consumption of beef is increased.
14

15. Figure 5. Perfectly Elastic Demand
As it is clear in the Figure 5, the average price for Indian beef is RM 13 per kg, thus
according to the figure 4 it is clear that quantity demand is always increasing during the last
decades. That means, that demand curve is perfectly horizontal or perfectly elastic (%∆P=0,
elasticity of demand, Ɛᴘ=∞). These results can be understood by next reasons. Firstly, beef as its
own has several types of substitutes (chicken, lamb, etc). Thus price changes in the long term
have elastic demand, due to the fact that buyers have enough information on the availability of
substitute products.
The main reason for Indian’s beef high level of demand is low price (RM 13/kg). During
the last decades people are used to buy Indian beef and for now it has its own brand name. Even
more the quality is not that high as Australian beef, the price plays important role. Whether
customer will buy 1 kg of Australian beef or will buy 3 kg of Indian beef. As majority of
population in Malaysia is low and middle class people and thus Malays, the consumption of
Indian beef is relatively high. Another reason is continuously raising population (26 mln.), which
is also leading for more supply of beef, especially for Indian one. As high population with high
rate of growth provides higher demand for goods and services. As it is known, most of
Malaysians eat outside on the daily basis (café, take away, fast food).
15

16. 4.
Analysis/Conclusion
Beef imports in Malaysia have increased from 1,955 tones in 1970 to 104,140 tones in
2006 (Tey Y.S., 2009). Because of high growth in income and increased population, changing
consumer preferences towards more Western styles beef consumption increased as well in
Malaysia. Racial and cultural background affect meat demand in Malaysia. As in fact, there are
three ethnic groups in Malaysia, where Malay (about 50% of population) are muslims who prefer
halal food, Chinese (25% of population) are major pork consumers and Indian (25% of
population) prefer meat, spices and bread.
16

17. Malaysian households spend around 24% of their household income on the purchase of
food (Tey Y.S., 2008). Demand for beef is seen as an inelastic, thus beef is normal good to
Malaysian consumers. Moreover, it is obvious that luxury good soon or later become normal
goods when per capita income approaches an affluent level. Dependence of beef import in
Malaysia is increasing, thus self-sufficiency level is low.
Consumers with larger household size tend to pay low prices for beef products so that
they can have larger quantity of beef for consumption. As a result, Chinese consumers are more
willing to pay for higher-priced (quality) beef products than other ethnics (Tey Y.S., 2008). By
the way, Malay consumers tend to substitute quality by quantity in the demand for beef.
Increased proportion in beef demand for quantity is seen on low-income customers.
Malaysian beef market has become more competitive with its open policy to welcome
more halal foreign producers in order to make higher value beef affordable to local consumers.
Reacting to changes on consumers preferences is the main driver in order to capture beef market
and thus become leader.
Important part in growth in beef consumption is increased sales from supermarkets.
These markets with modern food storage facilities became a vital outlet for chilled and frozen
beef.
In Malaysia applied tariffs for meat are zero. Nowadays Malaysia-Australia Free Trade
Agreement is under negotiation. Afterwards, if agreement will be signed that will lead to
decrease in beef price because the trade barriers will reduce.
As India became leader in Malaysian beef market, it can dictate prices. This is threat to
other exporters of beef and can limit the growth of Australian export either.
Because of high income and population growth beef consumption in Malaysia increases
over the last decades.
Malaysian government tries to make beef more affordable for people and get vital change
in the consumption of beef. After researching it is clear that demand for beef is inelastic. Also,
consumers tend to demand more quantity rather than quality of beef. Low-income consumers
buy low quality beef (buffalo).
17

18. 18

19. References:
1.
Prime Minister’s Department Malaysia, 2012, “The Malaysian Economy in
figures 2012”, Economic Planning Unit, www.epu.gov.my
2.
Tey Y.S., Mad Nasir S., Alias R., Zainalabidin M., Amin M.A., 2008, “Demand
for beef in Malaysia: preference for quantity, quality or lean?”, International Food Research
Journal, http://www.ifrj.upm.edu.my/15%20(3)%202008/13.%20Tey%20Y.S..pdf
3.
Tey Y.S., Fatimah M.A., Mad Nasir S., Alias R., 2009, “Demand for meat
quantity and quality in Malaysia: Implications to Australia”, Munich Personel RePEc Archieve,
http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/15032/1/MPRA_paper_15032.pdf
4.
Tey Y.S., Fatimah M.A., Mad Nasir S., Alias R., 2008, “Demand for meat
quantity and quality in Malaysia: Implications to Australia”, Munich Personel RePEc Archieve,
http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/15032/1/MPRA_paper_15032.pdf
5.
The
Cattle
Site,
2011,
online
resource,
http://www.thecattlesite.com/news/36366/malaysias-beef-imports-on-the-rise
6. Halal in India, 2010, online resource, http://www.halalinindia.com/meat.php
7.
Chang J., 2005, Malaysia poultry and products annual 2005, GAIN Report,
Foreign Agriculture Service, US Department of Agriculture, Washington DC, http://
www.fas.usda.gov/gainfiles/200509/146130759.pdf
19

20. 8.
Service,
Chang J., 2006, Malaysia exporter guide, GAIN Report, Foreign Agriculture
US
Department
of
Agriculture,
Washington
DC,
http://
www.fas.usda.gov/gainfiles/200610/146249302.pdf
9.
Mitchell D.O., Ingco M., Duncan R., 1997, The World Food Outlook, Cambridge
University Press
10.
MLA (Meat and Livestock Australia), Newsletter 2005, South-Asia and China
11.
Acme Articles, 2012, Australian Beef export industry, http://www.acme-
Update
articles.com/article/International/Consumer_Behavior_Australian_Beef_Export_Industry/88137
12.
Daviga V., Karunagaran M. and Rohana K., 2008, Macroeconomics, Oxford
University Press
13.
Anderson J. and Ferguson M., 2001, Value of ultrasound based predictions of
carcass quality grade, American Agriculture Economics Association Meeting
14.
Food Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, 2007, FAO
Statistical
Yearbook
Country
Profiles,
http://www.fao.org/ES/ESS/yearbook/vol_1_2/pdf/Malaysia.pdf
15.
Ishida A., Law S.H., Aita Y., 2003, Changes in food consumption expenditure in
Malaysia, Agribusiness 19(1)
16.
Baharumshah A.Z., 1993, Applying the almost ideal demand system to meat
expenditure data: Estimation and specification issues, Malaysian Journal of Agricultural
Economics 10
17.
Capps O., Schmitz J.D., 1991, A recognition of health and nutrition factors in
food demand analysis, Western Journal of Agricultural Economics 16
18.
Hsu H.H., Chern W.S., Gale F., 2001, How will rising income affect the structure
of food demand?, In Gale F., China’s food and agriculture: issues for the 21 st Century, Economic
Review Research Service, USDA
20

21. 21