The specifics of selected agricultural commodities in international trade

Keywords: international trade, export, import, agriculture, rice, soya, coffee.


Purpose. This paper evaluates the involvement of three selected agricultural commodities (rice, coffee and soya) in international trade. The aim is to analyze the specification of foreign trade in selected commodities and assess their different significance between representations in domestic markets and exports. This article will also assess other contexts related to international trade in these three commodities, including the negative effects on their trade. Based on the set goal, a research question was asked which evaluates the different position of the examined agricultural commodities on world export markets in relation to domestic consumption.

Methodology / approach. The theoretical anchoring of the issue under study are the approaches taken to international economic relations with the emphasis on the specific features of agricultural trade. The methodological framework of the present study is based on the systematic analysis of the spatial distribution of production capacities, the territorial analysis of exports and imports within the world agricultural market and qualitative evaluation of the specifics of selected export commodities and their role in the economy of countries, including labour market importance and in the possibilities of their use.

Results. The paper presents the results of the involvement of the rice, coffee and soya in international trade analysis. Most rice production is consumed on domestic markets. Unlike rice, most of the coffee produced is exported and less is consumed within the growing countries themselves. Although domestic coffee consumption is increasing, more than 70% of world production is exported. Soya bean production has increased significantly over the past 50 years as a result of the rising demand for animal feedstuff and biofuels. Almost three quarters of soya bean production is consumed as feedstuff.

Originality / scientific novelty. The main contribution of the article is in the application level the elaboration of a comparative view of three selected agricultural commodities. At the theoretical level of the study, it represents a contribution to the discussion within the approaches to the organization of global agricultural trade, the interdependence of economic policies of states, trade ties and the impact on labour markets in relation to production. Agricultural commodities remain an important item in world international trade. However, their share in the total volume is gradually declining. They play an important role in the maintenance of individual countries, but at the same time they are of great economic importance, although we can also mention the less positive aspects of their production, including their impact on the environment. At the same time, it is necessary to realize that this sector is essential for human survival and also that agriculture is important from the point of food security for the population, which can contribute to and increase the level of agricultural protectionism (resilience to world market disruptions or uncontrolled import of genetically modified (GM) food and the transmission of animal diseases). Agriculture is one of the most sensitive economic sectors in the world. Nevertheless, agricultural exports have several economic benefits, including stimulating a wide range of agricultural-related industries, transport suppliers, processing and farm inputs.

Practical value / implications. The production of agricultural commodities is of great importance to the economies of individual states, where it contributes to the creation of direct, indirect and induced jobs. The agrarian sector is a key sector, especially for less developed countries. The analysis confirmed the high tradability of all commodities examined and is documented by their involvement in the international division of labour in the global projection.


1. Satterthwaite, D., McGranahan, G. and Tacoli, C. (2010), Urbanization and its implications for food and farming. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, vol. 365, is. 1554, pp. 2809–2820.
2. Fanzo, J., Covic, N., Dobermann, A., Henson, S., Herrero, M., Pingali, P. and Staal, S. (2020), A research vision for food systems in the 2020s: defying the status quo. Global Food Security, vol. 26, 100397.
3. Prabhakar, S. V. R. K. (2021), A succinct review and analysis of drivers and impacts of agricultural land transformations in Asia. Land Use Policy, vol. 102, 105238.
4. Tiwari, A. K., Boachie, M. K., Suleman, M. T. and Gupta, R. (2021), Structure dependence between oil and agricultural commodities returns: the role of geopolitical risks. Energy, vol. 219,
5. Dumortier, J., Carriquiry, M. and Elobeid, A. (2021), Where does all the biofuel go? Fuel efficiency gains and its effects on global agricultural production, Energy Policy, vol. 148, 119584.
6. Nicholson, C. F., Stephens, E. C., Jones, A. D., Kopainsky, B., Parsons, D. and Garrett, J. (2021), Food security outcomes in agricultural systems models: current status and recommended improvements. Agricultural Systems, vol. 188, 103028.
7. Adamchick, J. and Perez, A. M. (2020), Choosing awareness over fear: risk analysis and free trade support global food security. Global Food Security, vol. 26, 100445.
8. Nicholson, C. F., Stephens, E. C., Jones, A. D., Kopainsky, B., Parsons, D. and Garrett, J. (2019), Setting priorities to address the research gaps between agricultural systems analysis and food security outcomes in low- and middle-income countries. CCAFS Working Paper no. 255. Wageningen, the Netherlands: CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS), available online at:
9. Ickowitz, A., Powell, B., Rowland, D., Jones, A. and Sunderland, T. (2019), Agricultural intensification, dietary diversity, and markets in the global food security narrative. Global Food Security, vol. 20, pp. 9–16.
10. Stephens, E., Jones, A. D. and Parsons, D. (2018), Agricultural systems research and global food security in the 21st century: an overview and roadmap for future opportunities. Agricultural Systems, vol. 163, pp. 1–6.
11. Willer, H. and Lernoud, J. eds (2019), The world of organic agriculture. Statistics and emerging trends 2019. Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL and IFOAM Organics International. Nürnberg, Germany.
12. Lopez, R. A., He, X. and De Falcis, E. (2017), What drives China’s new agricultural subsidies? World Development, vol. 93, pp. 279–292.
13. Schleifer, P. (2017), Private regulation and global economic change: the drivers of sustainable agriculture in Brazil. Governance, vol. 30, is. 4, pp. 687–703.
14. de los Reyes, J. and Sandwell, K. (2018), Flex crops: a primer. Transnational Institute (TNI) Agrarian and Environmental Justice Program. Think piece series on flex crops & commodities, No. 6 April 2018.
15. Greenville, J., Kawasaki, K. and Beaujeu, R. (2017), How policies shape global food and agriculture value chains. OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers, No. 100, OECD Publishing, Paris.
16. Gombkötő, N. (2017), International trade in agricultural and food products. IRACST – International Journal of Commerce, Business and Management, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 22–28.
17. Sentelhas, P., Battisti, R., Camara, G., Farias, J., Hampf, A. and Nendel, C. (2015), The soya bean yield gap in Brazil – magnitude, causes and possible solutions for sustainable production. The Journal of Agricultural Science, vol. 153, is. 8, pp. 1394–1411.
18. Rekow, L. (2019), Socio-ecological implications of soy in the Brazilian Cerrado. Challenges in Sustainability, vol. 7, is. 1, pp. 7–29.
19. Svatoš, M. and Smutka, L. (2012), Development of agricultural trade and competitiveness of the commodity structures of individual countries of the Visegrad Group. Agricultural Economics – Czech, vol. 58, pp. 222–238.
20. Torrion, J., Setiyono, T. D., Cassman, K. and Specht, J. (2011), Soya bean phenology simulation in North-Central United States. Agronomy Journal, vol. 103, is. 6, pp. 1661–1667.
21. Svatoš, M. and Smutka, L. (2009), Influence of the EU enlargement on the agrarian foreign trade development in member states. Agricultural Economics – Czech, vol. 55, pp. 233–249.
22. FAO (2018), Rice Market Monitor, available at:
23. Hendl, J. (2004), Přehled statistických dat: analýza a metanalýza dat. Portál, Praha, Czech Republic.
24. Krugman, P. R. and Obstfeld, M. (2003), International Economics: theory and Policy, 6th ed, Addison Wesley, USA.
25. Rojíček, M. (2012), Impact of Globalisation on the Functioning of International Trade. Politická ekonomie, vol. 2, pp. 187–207.
26. World Bank (2020), The World Bank Factbook, available at:
27. Samora, R. (2020), From soy to coffee, brazil ag commodities rise to record prices. Reuters, available at:
28. Statista (2020), Principal rice exporting countries worldwide in 2018/2019, available at:
29. Ewing, J. J. and Hongzhou, Z. (2013), China as the world’s largest rice importer: regional implications, available at:
30. ICO (2020), Find out more in the ICO's latest coffee market report, available at:
31. ICO (2019), Coffee development report, available at:
32. FAO (2020), Food and Agriculture Data, available at:
33. USDA (2019), USDA foreign agricultural service, available at: beans.
How to Cite
Abrhám, J., Vošta, M., Čajka, P., & Rubáček, F. (2021). The specifics of selected agricultural commodities in international trade. Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, 7(2), 5-19.