Upload
duongtram
View
226
Download
9
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
2 INTERNATIONAL EGG COMMISSION ANNUAL REVIEW 2012
3 Welcome from the Director General
4 Analysis 1
The banning of conventional layer cages in the European Union
10 Analysis 2
IEC comparison of international country data
16 Country statistics and reports
18 Argentina19 Australia20 Austria21 Belgium22 Brazil23 Canada24 China25 Colombia26 Cyprus27 Czech Republic28 Denmark29 Finland30 France31 Germany32 Greece33 Hungary34 India35 Iran
36 Ireland37 Italy38 Japan39 Mexico40 Netherlands41 New Zealand42 Nigeria43 Peru44 Poland45 Portugal46 Russia47 Slovakia48 South Africa49 Spain50 Sweden51 Switzerland52 Turkey53 United Arab Emirates54 Ukraine55 United Kingdom56 United States
Note:
Figures used in this document are
stated in United Kingdom format
with a “,” to separate 000s and a
“.” to denote decimal places.
In all cases for units of
measurement “t” means “tonnes”.
The currency used in this report
is US dollars. All data is available
in original currencies at www.
internationalegg.com/stats
58 Rapporteurs’ Contact Details60 IEC Awards: Past Winners61 CSR Statement62 Family Tree63 IEC Information
Annual Review 2012 Index
Thank you for all your support this year as the IEC
continues to grow, develop and move forward with key
projects.
Our international representation program is going from
strength to strength. IEC Chair Joanne Ivy continues to
personally represent IEC in developing our relationship with
the Consumer Goods Forum (the global Chief Executive
network for the world’s top 800 grocery retailers and food
manufacturers), and we have increasing recognition from
both the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and
the OIE, with IEC now having a seat on the OIE’s Animal
Welfare Working Group.
This year IEC has signed two formal agreements with
FAO. Firstly our joint Memorandum of Understanding,
where FAO recognises IEC as the voice of the global egg
industry and secondly a joint project to benchmark the
life cycle analysis / carbon footprint of the main livestock
sectors. This is a three year project with IEC having a place
on the FAO steering committee. Thank you to Dr Vincent
Guyonnet whose technical expertise and experience is so
valued by IEC and the international organisations with
which we work. We can now build on these relationships to
bring real, long term benefits to the egg industry.
The relationship with FAO is a strong part of IEC’s own
Corporate and Social Responsibility and one on which we
can build, offering new and exciting opportunities. One of
these opportunities is for FAO to help promote World Egg
Day through their network of regional offices. For World
Egg Day 2012 (12th October), IEC is providing its smart
new logo, dedicated information packs and professional
presentations to both IEC members and FAO regional
offices. This is backed up by a brand new website www.
worldeggday.com which will be launched in September
and will be available in 10 languages. World Egg Day 2012
continues the theme of CSR, not just in terms of helping
feed the hungry, but also in respecting the environment and
providing communities with the highest quality protein
product.
Thank you to all the Rapporteurs from around the world
who have once again provided statistics for this publication
from their individual countries. IEC now collects key egg
industry data from 15 of the top 16 egg producing countries
in the world. We would also like to welcome two new
countries who now provide data: Ukraine and Russia.
Not only does this Review give you a clearer picture of the
international egg market for the past two years, but also
when combined with our on-line interactive database, you
can analyse market trends from 2003 onwards. The value
of this Annual Review is greatly enhanced by the in-depth
professional analysis provided by both Peter van Horne (IEC
Economic Analyst) and Professor Hans-Wilhelm Windhorst
(IEC Statistical Analyst).
In this Review Professor Windhorst looks at one of the key
changes taking place in our industry, providing an “Analysis
on the banning of conventional layer cages in the European
Union”. Peter Van Horne follows this theme, using the
growing IEC database to analyse the three specific areas;
“Development in housing systems”, “Development in
egg consumption of shell eggs and egg products” and the
“Development in production cost of eggs.”
2012 has also seen the introduction of our new IEC
Constitution. One of the changes is the introduction of a
“shareholders” style meeting at the end of the conference
“the General Assembly of Members”. We encourage all IEC
members to come and participate in this meeting and to
continue to support the work of the IEC.
We continue to be in a period of historic change in many
egg industries around the world, and hope that you find the
information in this Review interesting and useful in helping
ensure that you create opportunities for development from
the changing situation. We wish you every success with your
business in the years ahead.
Welcome to the 2012 International Egg Commission Annual Review
Julian MadeleyIEC Director General
INTERNATIONAL EGG COMMISSION ANNUAL REVIEW 2012 3
4 INTERNATIONAL EGG COMMISSION ANNUAL REVIEW 2012
Professor Windhorst is the IEC
Statistical Analyst and was Director
of the Institute for Spatial Analysis
and Planning in Areas of Intensive
Agriculture at the University of
Vechta, Germany until April 2009,
an institute that he founded in 1990.
Much of his work involves
investigating regional and sectoral
patterns in the egg industry.
He studied at the University of
Muenster and gained a PHD in 1969
and then gained a postdoctoral
qualification in 1977.
Professor Windhorst has had a
long-standing involvement with the
IEC, and together with Peter van
Horne is developing the Economic
and Statistical service that the IEC
provides to members.
With thanks also to Aline Veauthier
and Anna Wilke, Institute for Spatial
Analysis and Planning in Areas
of Intensive Agriculture – ISPA,
University of Vechta
Introduction:
Directive 1999/74/EC – the legal basis
In the European Union (EU), the discussion
about keeping laying hens for egg production in
conventional cages has been going on for many
years. Today, the EU has one of the strictest legal
regulations for keeping animals in the world and is
a pioneer in this field for other countries.
On July 19th 1999, the EU Commission passed
Council Directive 1999/74/EC after long debates
and laid down minimum standards for the
protection of laying hens. The directive decided
that:
• from January 1st 2012 onwards all conventional
cages will be prohibited
• from January 1st 2003 onwards no such cages
must be installed in EU member countries
• member countries may decide to ban
conventional cages earlier and to tighten
regulations of the directive.
Directive 1999/74/EC distinguishes between
alternative systems, unenriched cage systems and
enriched cages. The regulations for enriched
cages are summarized in the adjacent
panel.
The Commission also decided that before
the final implementation of the directive,
additional scientific studies should be
undertaken to analyze the impacts on the
welfare of laying hens and the economy of
production.
In 2007, the results of these studies were available
and the Commission decided in 2008 that the
original regulations of the directive would not be
modified.
The problem was that it took nine years before
the final decision was passed and during this time
period almost no investments were made because
nobody was sure about the final regulations of the
directive.
Analysis One The banning of conventional layer cages in the European Union
Laying hens must have:
• At least 116 inches2 (750cm2) of cage per hen,
of which 93 inches2 (600 cm2) shall be usable
• The height of the cage has to be at least 7.9
inches (20cm) at every point, including the perch
area
• No cage shall have a total area that is less than
310 inches2 (2,000cm2)
• A nest
• Litter, such that pecking and scratching are
possible
• Appropriate perches: at least 5.9 inches (15cm)
per hen
• A feed trough which may be used without
restriction (length 4.7 inches (12cm) x number of
hens in cage)
• A drinking system appropriate to the size of the
group (at least two nipple drinkers in reach of
each hen)
• To allow inspection, the aisle has to have a
minimum width of 35.4 inches (90cm)
• A space of at least 13.8 inches (35cm) must be
allowed between the bottom of the first tier and
the floor
• Cages must be fitted with
suitable claw-shortening
devices
REgULATIons foR EnRIChEd CAgEs
Analysis 1Professor Hans-Wilhelm Windhorst IEC Statistical AnalystJuly 2012
INTERNATIONAL EGG COMMISSION ANNUAL REVIEW 2012 5
The transformation of cages to alternative systems
began in 2007, but most of the new systems were
not implemented before 2009 and 2010. In fact,
in the fourth quarter of 2009, many egg companies
placed pullets in their old cages because of the
lower production costs.
Under the high pressure of animal welfare groups,
the leading food retailers announced in 2010 that
they would no longer list eggs produced in any form
of cages, including colony nests. Consequently, the
installation of colony nests immediately stopped
and most of the egg companies switched to barn
systems, which caused high financial losses.
As an impact of the banning of cages, egg
production in Germany has decreased
continuously since 2000 and the self-sufficiency
rate fell from 74 % in 2002 to only 59 % in 2009
and to 55 % in 2010, while the share of imports of
eggs increased rapidly by 1.4 billion eggs between
2008 and 2009 to meet the demand (Figure 1).
Banning of cages in Germany
For years, animal welfare has played an important
role in German society and has become more and
more important for the egg industry.
The opposition against keeping layers in cages
started in the 1960s, parallel to the installation of
such systems. While the first opponents were small
and unorganized groups of animal welfare activists,
in 1980 the Green Party was founded in Germany
and became the “catchment basin” for various non-
parliamentary opposition groups.
From 1998 to 2005 there was a Red-Green
government coalition in office in Germany and
the Secretary of Agriculture was a member of the
Green Party. One of the main topics of the party
platform of the Green Party at that time was the
prohibition of layers in cages. So, in 1999, the
Red-Green-administration introduced a directive
into the EU Commission to prohibit conventional
layer cages that finally became the famous directive
1999/74/EC.
The German Red-Green administration made use
of the regulation in Directive 1999/74/EC that the
member countries could tighten the regulations
of the directive and apply the directive earlier than
January 1st 2012.
In 2006, the German Parliament passed
the Animal Welfare Law which stated that
conventional cages would be prohibited in
Germany by January 1st 2009, i.e. three years
earlier than in other member countries of the
EU. Moreover, the regulatory statutes for keeping
laying hens would deviate from the EU directive.
So, enriched cages would not be permitted in
Germany. Instead, colony nests would be permitted
if they allowed a space of 124 inches² (800 cm²)
per hen up to 2 kg and 139 inches² (900 cm²) for
hens above 2 kg, if the single “apartments” had a
size of at least 20.6 sqfeet (2.5 m²) and were at least
23.6 inches (60 cm) high in the trough area and
19.7 inches (50 cm) high in all other parts of the
“cage” and if there were not more than 60 hens per
“apartment”.
FIgURE 1: ImPoRt oF SHELL EggS ANd dEgREE oF SELF SUFFICIENCy IN gERmANy
9.0
8.0
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011*
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 Degr
ee o
f sel
f suf
ficie
ncy
in %
Impo
rt of
she
ll eg
gs in
tsd
piec
es
*ForecastDegree of self-sufficiency
Source: MEG 2001-2011
Import of shell eggs67
4360
4717
4551 48
80
5281
5699 58
75 6047
6039
7509
8271
6286
74 7471 71 69
67 67 69
59
55
6467
6 INTERNATIONAL EGG COMMISSION ANNUAL REVIEW 2012
In March 2012, the German Bundesrat (Chamber
of the Bundesländer) decided that colony nests
would only be permitted until 2023 (in hardship
cases until 2025), deviating from the Ministry
of Agriculture which had suggested 2035 as the
deadline. The Secretary of Agriculture did not
sign the decision of the Bundesrat, so that strictly
speaking there is no legal basis for keeping laying
hens in Germany.
Moreover, leading German retailers decided not
to sell any eggs from colony nests due to animal
welfare reasons. As a result, eggs from such forms
of housing system could only be sold at farmer’s
markets and to the egg processing industry. For
Germany, colony nests definitely will not be the
housing system of the future because they are not
accepted by the retailers which are under great
pressure from the NGOs.
In addition, the number of layers also decreased
from 43.5 mill. birds to 36.4 mill. birds in 2009.
It was not before 2011 that the egg market began
to recover, production started to increase again,
imports decreased and the degree of self-sufficiency
also increased to 64 %. As late as 2012, the
production volume once again reached the level it
had been before the cage ban (AgE 2012).
The transformation process also had impacts on
costs and prices. At Easter 2010, with 14.5 € per
100 barn eggs, (size L, bulk), the highest price
was recorded because of the combination of egg
shortage due to the transformation process and a
growing demand. Only a few months later, there
was a dramatic price decrease to 6 € and an egg
oversupply because the transformation had been
finalized, the demand during summer was low and
in addition, large quantities had been imported. In
2011, there was a further price decline to 5.4 € due
to the Dioxin crisis.
As a further result of the cage ban, housing systems
changed in Germany. In 2005, more than 73 % of
laying hens were still kept in conventional cages,
14 % in barn systems and 13 % in free range while
organic production was only a very small niche
market. But in 2011, almost 63 % of laying hens
were kept in barn systems, 14.6 % in free range,
7.3 % in organic systems and only 14.6 % in colony
nests as Figure 2 shows.
It will take the German egg industry several more
years to recover from the economic impacts of the
transformation. Germany will remain the leading
egg importing country in the future and its main
suppliers will be the Netherlands, Spain and
Poland.
Even though scientific studies document that
colony nests are an animal welfare friendly housing
system because they meet most of the demands
of the animals, German NGOs have continued
their fight against this form of “cages”. In 2011,
they even went to court with the argument that
they had not been included in the earlier decision
to introduce colony nests after the banning of
conventional cages.
0
10
20
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
%
Organic systems
Source: MEG (2012); AgE (2012)
Free range
Barn systems
Colony nests (2010/2011 includes enriched cages)
Conventional cages (includes enriched cages)
FIgURE 2: LAyINg HENS by HoUSINg SyStEmS IN gERmANy
Analysis One The banning of conventional layer cages in the European Union
INTERNATIONAL EGG COMMISSION ANNUAL REVIEW 2012 7
Status of the transformation process in the EU
As described earlier, legally, conventional cages
are prohibited in all EU member countries as of
January 1st 2012. Similar to Germany, many egg
farmers in other countries placed pullets in old
systems in the last quarter of 2011. In addition, the
economic crisis in Southern Europe did not allow a
transformation in time.
The latest available data for November 2011
(Figure 3) shows that 36 % of laying hens were kept
in enriched cages, 21 % in barn systems, 11 % in
free range and 3 % in organic systems. But
according to estimations of the EU Commission
14 % of layers were still kept in conventional cages
and another 15 % were not defined.
Figure 4 shows housing systems in egg production
for each EU member country in 2010.
Unfortunately, more recent data is not available
at the moment. Nevertheless, the figure gives
an impression of how housing systems after the
transformation will differ in various countries.
In nine countries conventional cages still
dominated egg production in 2010. While most
Eastern and Southern European countries started
to change to enriched cages, the share of barn
systems increased in Germany, Austria, Sweden,
the Netherlands and Slovenia.
In Ireland and the United Kingdom, free range was
already very important compared to other housing
systems in 2010. In the United Kingdom about
40 % of layers were kept in free range systems, 30
% in Ireland, while barn systems did not play an
important role in both countries. In most countries
organic production was very low, exceptions were
Denmark, Sweden, Germany and Austria where
organic systems reached a higher percentage.
Figure 6 provides an overview of countries that
already used alternative layer systems in 2010. This
confirms that the transformation in Southern and
Eastern member countries started later and that
most of these countries still used conventional
cages in 2010.
FIgURE 3: HoUSINg SyStEmS IN EU Egg PRodUCtIoN (NoVEmbER 2011)
FIgURE 4: HoUSINg SyStEmS IN Egg PRodUCtIoN IN EU mEmbER CoUNtRIES (2010)
Organic systems
Source: EMA (2012)
Free range
Barn systems
Colony nests (2010/2011 includes enriched cages)
Conventional cages (includes enriched cages)
Not defined
0
10
20
CZ EL ES PT PL BE SK IT BG IE CY FR NL SI EE LT RO UK FI HU DK LV SE DE AT
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
%
Organic systems
Source: MEG
Free range
Barn systems
Enriched cages
Conventional cages
8 INTERNATIONAL EGG COMMISSION ANNUAL REVIEW 2012
A comparison of Figures 5 and 6 shows the progress
of the transformation process between 2010 and
2012.
It is apparent that a lot of member countries had
not concluded the transformation process on
January 1st 2012 according to the time schedule
of Directive 1999/74/EC. There were still
conventional cage systems in use in France, Poland,
Belgium, Spain, Italy, Portugal, the Netherlands,
Latvia, Greece, Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania,
Cyprus and Malta. Together they kept 46.7 mill.
birds or 14 % of all hens in the EU in old cages(AgE
2012).
Despite the ongoing transformation process,
a massive reduction of the number of layers as
happened in Germany, is not expected in most of
the EU member countries. However, old housing
systems may be used parallel to new systems.
Eggs produced in conventional cages with lower
production costs are therefore still in the market in
2012 but they are not allowed to be traded over the
border in the EU.
Strictly speaking, conventional cages are an illegal
housing system for layers in the EU. Several
countries argue that they lack the financial means
to transform the old housing system to alternative
systems in time. On the other hand, countries
like Germany and Austria which concluded the
transformation in, or even before time, argue
that they have to protect their egg farmers against
imports from countries which still use conventional
cages because of the lower production costs in these
countries. Animal Welfare Organizations have also
sharply criticized the state of conversion, especially
regarding the long transition period since the
passing of the directive.
Status of transformation on 1 January 2012
0 500
Kilometres
1000
Concluded
Not concluded
Database AgE (2012)
FIgURE 5: HoUSINg SyStEmS IN EU mEmbER CoUNtRIES (2010)
FIgURE 6: StAtUS oF tHE tRANSFoRmAtIoN oF CoNVENtIoNAL CAgES to ALtERNAtIVE HoUSINg SyStEmS (2010)
Laying hens in millions
Housing systems
0 500
502513
Kilometres
*Enriched cages, barn systems, free range, organic
** Conventional (old cages)
1000
EU member states
Permitted*
Not permitted**
Database MEG (2012)
Analysis One The banning of conventional layer cages in the European Union
INTERNATIONAL EGG COMMISSION ANNUAL REVIEW 2012 9
ReferencesOutlook
The EU Commission has now determined
June 30th 2012, as the latest deadline for the
transformation and is going to penalize countries
for not meeting the deadline. But altogether, it is
still an open question what is really going to happen
after June 30th.
A further question is, will the EU become an egg
deficit region from 2012 onwards? For years, the
self-sufficiency rate of shell eggs for consumption
has been quite stable with 102 %. If no new hen
houses were built and new housing systems were
installed, the number of hens would decrease by
15 % to 20 % because of the lower number of birds
per m² in enriched cages and barn systems. This
would result in a considerable decline of the
self-sufficiency rate and make imports necessary.
But as in most member countries old systems have
been used parallel to new systems, such a massive
short-term decline has not occured so far.
At the time this report was completed (July 2012),
no data was available to analyze the current status
of the transformation process and the economic
consequences of the conventional cage ban in the
EU. Moreover, there is a great uncertainty about
the reliability of the data some countries gave to the
European Commission.
Outside the EU, banning of conventional
layer cages is also discussed in some countries,
especially in the USA. Lessons to be learned
from the European experience are that the time
span between the passing of the law and the
regulatory statutes has to be short. Otherwise, the
transformation process does not begin and at the
end leaves insufficient time for the egg companies
to install the new housing systems. In Germany
for example, empty and unused facilities were the
result in late 2009 and 2010.
AgE (2011): Umstellung der Legehennenhaltung nicht erreicht. In: AGRA-EUROPE 9/12, 27. Februar 2012.
AgE (2012): Legehennenbestand erreicht Vor-Käfigverbotsniveau. In: AGRA-EUROPE 1/2/12, 9. Januar 2012.
EMA (2012): EMA-Marktbilanz 2012 Eier, Bonn.
MEG (2012): MEG-Marktbilanz Eier und Geflügel 2012.
Windhorst, H.-W. (2010): Banning of cages in Germany and after. First results of the largest economic field experiment in the egg industry. In: International Egg Commission (ed.): International Egg Market. Annual Review 2010. London 2010, S. 4-9.
Windhorst, H.-W. (2011): Banning of Layer Cages in the EU – Background, Regulations and Economic Impacts - Paper presented at the Iowa Poultry Association Fall Banquet, Des Moines, Iowa, September 14th, 2011.
10 INTERNATIONAL EGG COMMISSION ANNUAL REVIEW 2012
In 2012 all the IEC rapporteurs provided
information on the egg industry in their country.
Over the years the number of countries has
expanded and this year the IEC collected data
from 38 countries. As we have collected the same
data now for several years we can analyse the
developments over time. In this article an analysis
was made for three different topics:
1. Development in housing systems
2. Development in egg consumption of shell eggs
and egg products
3. Development in production costs of eggs
Housing systems
The IEC collects data on housing systems based on
a division into three categories: cage, barn and free
range. Cage systems include conventional cages,
enriched cages and colony enriched cages. Barn
systems are indoor non- cage floor systems (barn,
deep litter and aviary systems). Free range systems
give layers access to an outdoor area and also
include organic production. Legislation in the EU
forced farmers to ban the conventional cage system
and replace it with enriched cages or an alternative
non-cage housing system. It is interesting to see
how the share per housing systems developed in
recent years in the EU countries and whether
there is any similar movement in countries
outside the EU. Figure 1 gives the development
of the percentage per housing system in some EU
countries which provided data to the IEC over the
longest number of years.
Figure 1 shows that in some EU countries the share
of cage housing rapidly decreased between 2007
and 2011. Austria and Germany have additional
legislation above EU level with an earlier ban
on conventional cages. This explains the more
rapid move to a low level of cage housing. Figure
1 illustrates that the share of cage housing is
declining in Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden and
the UK. However, in France and especially in Spain
the share of cage housing was still at a high level in
2011.
Outside Europe the cage system is the dominant
housing system for layers. According to the IEC
data there is some development in the share
of housing systems in Australia, Canada, New
Zealand and USA. Figure 2 gives an overview of the
development of the share of hens in cage systems in
recent years in selected countries outside Europe.
In Australia and New Zealand particularly, the
percentage of hens in cage systems is declining. The
numbers of hens in cage systems in Canada was
96% (data 2010) and 94% in the USA (data 2011).
In many other countries the percentage of hens
kept in cages on commercial farms is, according
to the IEC data, 100% To be mentioned are the
countries Brazil, India, Iran and Mexico.
Analysis 2 Peter van HorneIEC Economic AnalystJuly 2012
Analysis Two IEC comparison of country data
Peter van Horne is IEC’s Economic
Analyst and is a senior economist
at the LEI Institute of Wageningen
University and Research Centre
in the Netherlands. He is Europe’s
premier Poultry Economist and
specialises in poultry research
projects for government and
industry with particular focus
on the economics of animal
welfare, environmental protection,
animal health and international
competition.
Peter has had a long-standing
involvement with the IEC and
together with Professor Windhorst
is developing the Economic and
Statistical service that the IEC
provides to members.
INTERNATIONAL EGG COMMISSION ANNUAL REVIEW 2012 11
FIgURE 1. dEVELoPmENt oF tHE SHARE oF HENS IN CAgE SyStEmS IN RECENt yEARS IN SELECtEd EURoPEAN CoUNtRIES
FIgURE 2. dEVELoPmENt oF tHE SHARE oF HENS IN CAgE SyStEmS IN RECENt yEARS IN SELECtEd CoUNtRIES oUtSIdE EURoPE
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Austria Denmark Finland France Germany Italy Netherlands Spain Sweden UK
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Source: IEC database
Source: IEC database0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Argentina Australia Canada New Zealand USA
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
12 INTERNATIONAL EGG COMMISSION ANNUAL REVIEW 2012
Figure 4 gives the egg consumption data for some
countries outside Europe. Total egg consumption
is low in Brazil and South Africa, high in Argentina
and the USA and very high in Japan. The data
also illustrates that the share of egg products is
low in Brazil (6%), South Africa (5%), Iran (7%)
and Argentina (6%). Generally speaking, the
consumption of egg products is higher in countries
with a relatively high income. In Canada and the
USA the share of egg products is 27% and 31%
respectively. In Japan the share is 50%, which can
be explained by the specific food traditions and
special dishes consumed in Japan.
Consumption shell eggs and egg products
The IEC rapporteurs are asked to give the
consumption data in their country. Total egg
consumption is the total of eggs consumed as
shell eggs and egg products. The consumption of
egg products is calculated in shell egg equivalent.
However, not all IEC countries give the break
down in shell eggs and egg products. The countries
providing the data in 2010 or 2011 are given in
Figure 3 (European countries) and Figure 4 (non
European countries).
Figure 3 illustrates that there is a wide range in
level of total egg consumption. Of the selected
countries Ireland has the lowest and France has
the highest total egg consumption per capita per
year. At the same time there is wide variation in
the share of egg products in total egg consumption.
Countries with a high share of egg products are
Belgium (44%), France (39%), Italy (36%) and
Switzerland (36%). These countries have a share
clearly higher than the European average (of the
countries mentioned in Figure 3) which is 27%. In
Ireland and Finland consumption of egg products
is below the European average. There could be a
discussion as to whether the given data per country
reflects the real consumption. It is known that Italy
has a high consumption of pasta and as a result a
high consumption of egg products. However, for
Belgium it is known that this country has a large
egg processing industry and a large volume of
exports of egg products. It could be possible that
the consumption of egg products is overestimated
as the result of a lack of correction for the export of
egg products in the calculation of the consumption
data.
Analysis Two IEC comparison of country data
INTERNATIONAL EGG COMMISSION ANNUAL REVIEW 2012 13
FIgURE 3. totAL Egg CoNSUmPtIoN (NUmbER oF EggS PER CAPItA PER yEAR) dIVIdEd INto CoNSUmPtIoN oF SHELL EggS ANd Egg PRodUCtS FoR SELECtEd EURoPEAN CoUNtRIES.
FIgURE 4. totAL Egg CoNSUmPtIoN (NUmbER oF EggS PER CAPItA PER yEAR) dIVIdEd INto CoNSUmPtIoN oF SHELL EggS ANd Egg PRodUCtS FoR SELECtEd NoN EURoPEAN CoUNtRIES.
Source: IEC database
0
50
100
150
200
250
shell eggs
egg products
Finlan
d
Franc
e
Irelan
d
Italy
Netherl
ands
Belgium
Sweden
Switzerl
and
UK
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Brazil
South
Africa
Iran
Canad
a
Argenti
na
USAJa
pan
Source: IEC database
shell eggs
egg products
14 INTERNATIONAL EGG COMMISSION ANNUAL REVIEW 2012
can have an impact on the outcome. Figure 6 shows
that in 2011 in all countries (except for India)
the production costs of eggs were at the highest
level since 2007. For most countries the last peak
in production costs was 2008. However, this was
not the situation in Argentina, Canada, India
and Japan. Obviously other factors influenced
the development in production costs in these
countries. Figure 6 also illustrates the large
differences in level of production costs between the
countries. When we focus on the level in 2011 we
see the lowest production costs in India, followed
by Argentina, USA and Mexico. Japan and Canada
have the highest production of eggs of the nine
selected countries shown in Figure 6.
Production costs of eggs
The feed price has a large impact on the production
costs of eggs. The share of feed costs in the total
production cost of eggs in a cage housing systems
is 55 to 60%. If you include the feed costs during
the rearing period of the pullet this share is even
higher, 60 to 65%. For a long period, since 2000,
the layer feed price was very stable. After the sharp
increase in 2008 the feed price was at a lower level
during 2009 and 2010. In 2011 the feed price
increased again to record levels. In the spring and
summer of 2012 feed prices are still at a very high
level. Figure 5 gives a historic overview of the layer
feed price in the USA and in the Netherlands
(representing the EU). In the Netherlands the price
of layer feed the farmers are paying to the feed mill
is available on a monthly basis. Every month the
LEI research institute presents this price on their
website (www.lei.wur.nl). In the USA the layer feed
price is calculated based on published prices of
corn and soybeans in addition to the costs of other
ingredients, milling and transport costs. This price
is calculated by the Egg Industry Center in IOWA.
The feed price in both countries shows a similar
development with very high prices in 2011 and in
the first half of 2012.
It is interesting to see how the production costs
developed in 2011 according to the information
collected by the IEC rapporteurs. Figure 6 gives
an overview of the production costs (in US$
per dozen eggs) during the last 5 years for some
selected countries. It should clearly be stated that
these prices are in US$. This means that changes
in exchange rate of the local currency to the US$
Analysis Two IEC comparison of country data
INTERNATIONAL EGG COMMISSION ANNUAL REVIEW 2012 15
Source: LEI Wageningen UR and Egg Industry Center, Iowa
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
Jan
2000
Jan
2001
Jan
2002
Jan
2003
Jan
2004
Jan
2005
Jan
2006
Jan
2007
Jan
2008
Jan
2009
Jan
2010
Jan
2011
Jan
2012
NL price (euro/100kg)
US price ($/100kg)
Source: IEC database
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
2.00
Argentina Brazil Canada India Japan Netherlands Mexico UK USA
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
$
FIgURE 5. dEVELoPmENt oF tHE PRICE oF LAyER FEEd FRom JANUARy 2000 to JUNE 2012 IN tHE USA (US$ PER 100 kg) ANd tHE NEtHERLANdS (EURo PER 100 kg).
FIgURE 6. dEVELoPmENt oF PRodUCtIoN CoStS (IN US$ PER dozEN EggS) IN 2007 tILL 2011 IN SELECtEd CoUNtRIES (dAtA WAS Not AVAILAbLE FoR A PERIod oF 5 yEARS FoR mANy CoUNtRIES).
58 INTERNATIONAL EGG COMMISSION ANNUAL REVIEW 2012
Contact details: Rapporteurs
Jorge Nazar Codepra SAPte Luis Saenz Pena 16461135 Captial FederalBuenos AiresArgentinaPhone +54 1 1430 46004Fax +54 1 1430 [email protected] www.avicoper.com
James kellaway Australian Egg Corporation LtdManaging DirectorSuite 4.02Level 4107 Mount StreetNth SydneyNSWAustraliaPhone +61 2 9409 6999Fax +61 2 9954 [email protected]
Rowly Horn AustraliaPnone +61 2 4572 0318Fax +61 2 4572 [email protected]
dr michael Wurzer Chief ExecutiveZentrale Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Osterreichischen Geflugelwirtschaft (ZAG)Dresdner Strasse 89/19Vienna 1200AustriaPhone +43 1 334 1721 60Fax +43 1 334 [email protected]
Johan Van bosch NVESpastraat 8Brussels B-1000BelgiumPhone +32 2 238 0633Fax +32 2 238 [email protected]
Jose Carlos teixeira da SilvaRua Professor Artur Ramos350 - APT 702FSao Paulo 01454-010BrazilPhone +55 11 3031 3324Fax +55 11 3815 [email protected]
Isabelle Landry Egg Farmers Of Canada21 Florence StreetOttawaOntario K2P 0W6CanadaPhone +1 613 238 2514Fax +1 613 238 [email protected] www.eggs.ca
Wayne Liu Managing Director Ovodan Foods (China) Ltd 386 Jinxian RoadJinjiaba Town Development ZoneWujiang CitySuzhouJiangsu Province215215China Phone: +86 512 6320 6111-201 Fax: +86 512 6320 6222 [email protected] www.ovodan.com
Adriana Quintero FENAVICalle 67No. 7-35 Oficina 610Bogota, ColombiaPhone +57 1 3211 212Fax +57 1 3219 [email protected]
the director of the department of AgricultureLouki Akrita AvenueNicosia1412CyprusPhone +357 22 408 555Fax +357 22 303 [email protected]
mie Nielsen blom Danish Poultry CouncilTrommesalen 5 4th FloorCopenhagen DK-1614DenmarkPhone +45 33 25 41 00Fax +45 33 25 11 [email protected] www.poultry.dk
Sari kreusMunakuntaPO Box 6Piispanristi FIN-20761FinlandPhone +358 2 214 4228Fax +358 2 214 [email protected]
Agnes braine ITAVI4 Rue de la BienfaisanceParis F-75008FrancePhone +33 1 4522 7705Fax +33 1 4522 [email protected]
margit beck MEG - Marktinfo Eier & GeflügelRedaktion und MarktanalyseRochusstraße 147Bonn D-53123GermanyPhone +49 228 629 47 971Fax +49 228 962 00 [email protected] www.marktinfo-eier-gefluegel.de
yannis Vlachakis Greek Poultry Industry Association54 Menandrou StreetAthens 10431GreecePhone +30 210 523 8190Fax +30 210 522 [email protected]
Peter Foldi Poultry Product Board ofHungaryAkademia u. 1BudapestPest H-1054HungaryPhone +36 1 269 2996Fax +36 1 332 [email protected] www.jomagyarbaromfi.hu
b.S.R. Sastry AGM (ADMN)MVL House, 1st Floor16-A GultekadiNear Nisarga Mangal KaryalayaPune 411 037IndiaPhone +91 020 2427 0724Fax +91 020 2427 [email protected] www.e2necc.com
dr behnam bastani Telavang4th Floor241 Azadi AvenueTehran 14199-35183IranPhone +98 21 66439 801Fax +98 21 66439 [email protected] www.poultrylinks.com
Robert byrneDepartment of Agriculture, Fisheries & FoodMeat Policy Division4 East Agriculture HouseKildare StreetDublin 2IrelandPhone +353 1 607 2263Fax +353 1 607 [email protected]
dr Rita Pasquarelli Unione Nazionale AvicolturaVia Vibio Mariano 58Rome I-00189ItalyPhone +39 06 3325 841Fax +39 06 3325 [email protected]
dr michio Sugiyama PresidentTokaigakuin UniversityNaka-Kirino5-68 Kakami GaleraGifu504-8511 JapanPhone +81 58 389 2200Fax +81 58 389 [email protected]
Sergio Chavez Executive PresidentUnion Nacional de Avicultores (UNA)Medellin 325Col Roma SurMexico CityDF CP 06760MexicoPhone +52 55 5564 9322Fax +52 55 5584 [email protected]
Richard Hol PVELouis Braillelaan 80Postbus 460-2700AL ZoetermeerNetherlandsPhone +31 79 368 7571Fax +31 79 368 [email protected]
Steven kerrEgg Producers Federation of New Zealand IncExecutive Officer - Technical1st Floor96 D Carlton Gore RoadAuckland 1001New ZealandPhone +64 9 520 4300Fax +64 9 520 [email protected]
dr olatunde Agbato Animal Care Services Konsult Nigeria Limited Iperu RoadLagos ExpresswayOgere-RemoOgun StateNigeria Phone: +234 8022 902318 Fax: +234 8055 589024 [email protected]
Vasco masiasOvosur SA Los Horizontes Mn1 L7Los HuertosLima 9Peru Phone: +51 1 254 3371 Fax: +51 1 254 4450 [email protected]
manuel Lima FepasaRue Elas Garcia 30Venda NovaAmadora2700-237PortugalPhone +351 214 74 6138Fax +351 214 74 [email protected]
Norbert mischkeLohmann Tierzucht 27472 Cuxhaven am Seedeich 9-11GermanyPhone: +49 4721 505279Fax: +49 4721 [email protected]
Norbert PapranecEuropack LtdVelkoblahovska 680Dunajska Streda929 01SlovakiaPhone +421 315 525662Fax: +421 315 [email protected]
maria Jamborova VUEPP(Public Research House of Foodand Agricultural Economy)Slovakia
magda Prinsloo Southern African PoultryAssociationPO Box 1202Honeydew 2040South AfricaPhone +27 11 795 2051Fax +27 11 795 [email protected]
maria del mar Fernandez Poza INPROVOJuan Montalvo 5 I DMadrid E-28040SpainPhone +34 91 598 5920Fax +34 91 456 [email protected]
Alexandra HermanssonSwedish Egg & Poultry AssociationSFS - Svenska AggFranzengatan 6Stockholm S-10533SwedenPhone +46 8 787 5487Fax +46 8 787 [email protected]
Alois mettler National Poultry CentreLindachstr. 24PO Box 81Kirchlindach CH-3038SwitzerlandPhone +41 31 822 0573Fax +41 31 822 [email protected]
derya Pala ChairmanYum-Bir-Turkish Egg Producers AssociationCetin Emec Bulvari 8 CaddeNo: 4/6 Ovecler Ankara06440 TurkeyPhone +90 312 4732000Fax +90 312 [email protected]
Firas Rabah Managing Director Taam Foodstuff TRD Stor 11a, Street 36, Indus. Area 2Sharjah37233United Arab Emirates Phone: +97 1 5067 11033 Fax: +97 1 6533 5262 [email protected]
Anton PashynskyiLLC “Agrarian Holding Avangard” 7/9 Schorsa Str.Kyiv, 03150UkrainePhone: +38 067 538 70 [email protected]
mark WilliamsBritish Egg Industry Council2nd Floor89 Charterhouse StreetLondon EC1M 6HRUKPhone +44 207 608 3760Fax +44 207 608 3860mark.williams@ britisheggindustrycouncil.com
maro IbarburuBusiness AnalystEgg Industry CenterIOWA State University201 C Kildee HallAmesIA 50011USAPhone + 1 515 294 8132Fax + 1 515 294 [email protected]
INTERNATIONAL EGG COMMISSION ANNUAL REVIEW 2012 59
INTERNATIONAL EGG COMMISSION ANNUAL REVIEW 2012 61
IEC Statement on Corporate and Social Responsibility
The International Egg Commission, on behalf of the global egg
community, defines social responsibility as balancing the needs of
people, animals and the planet.
When evaluating our social responsibility, we are passionate about:
1) Producing safely, the highest quality protein.
2) Feeding the growing population, and ensuring food affordability.
3) Providing choice.
4) Caring for the environment.
and
5) Ensuring the health and wellbeing of our hens.
62 INTERNATIONAL EGG COMMISSION ANNUAL REVIEW 2012
The IEC family tree
Chairman (Sep 2010-Sep 2013)
Ms J C Ivy (USA)
Vice Chairman
C de Anda (Mexico)
Hon President (Sep 2010-Sep 2013)
F Pace (Australia)
office Holders
Ms J C Ivy (USA) - Chairman
C de Anda (Mexico) - Vice Chairman
B Dellaert (Netherlands)
A Joret (UK)
T Lambert (Canada)
Financial Controllers
A Mettler (Switzerland)
J Ironside (Australia)
Executive board
Ms J C Ivy (USA) - Chairman
C de Anda (Mexico) - Vice Chairman
B Dellaert (Netherlands)
A Joret (UK)
T Lambert (Canada)
C de Magalhaes (Netherlands)
C Gregory (USA)
S Manton (UK)
J Kellaway (Australia)
J Nazar (Argentina)
Australia
F Pace
J Ironside
Austria
F Hofer
M Wurzer
barbados
W Clarke
Canada
P Clarke
F Krahn
China
Han Wei
Colombia
A Moncada
Cyprus
L Yianakou
denmark
J Larsen
Finland
J Lahde
J-P Takku
France
V Gonnier
germany
C von der Crone
H Tiemann
greece
A Modiano
Committees
marketing
J Kellaway (Chairman Sep 2011-Sep 2014)
Mrs M del Mar Fernandez Poza (Deputy Chairman)
Production and trade
J Nazar (Chairman Sep 2011-Sep 2014)
G Hinton (Deputy Chairman)
Economics and Statistics
C Gregory (Chairman Sep 2009-Sep 2012)
S Chavez (Deputy Chairman)
Egg Processors International (EPI)
S Manton (Chairman Sep 2010-Sep 2013)
B Schneppe (Deputy Chairman)
H Pedersen (Deputy Chairman)
membership
C de Magalhaes (Chairman Sep 2009-Sep 2012)
F Hofer (Deputy Chairman)
Honorary Life members of IEC
A Craig (Canada)
B Ellsworth (Canada)
W Kallhammer (Austria)
P Kemp (UK)
Dr A H Oliver (S Africa)
A Pope (USA)
Mrs D I (Sue) Richardson (UK)
H U L Van Damme (Belgium)
O Winfridsson (Sweden)
M Weller (UK)
Country Representatives at IEC general Assembly IEC Family tree
guatemala
O Segovia
Hungary
P Foldi
India
Mrs A Desai
Iran
M Masoumi
Ireland
O Brooks
F Grimes
Republic of korea
Yoo Jae Heung
Latvia
A Veinbergs
mauritius
B Montocchio
mexico
J Crivelli
S Chavez
Netherlands
B Dellaert
A Mijs
New zealand
M Guthrie
M Brooks
Norway
M Nilsen
O Bergsaker
Singapore
Koh Swee Lai
Slovakia L Fazekas
South Africa
K Lovell
Spain
M Del Mar
Fernandez Poza
Sweden
A Hermansson
Switzerland
A Mettler
D Ruegg
thailand
S Kaophuthai
C Pramote
turkey
D Pala
United Arab Emirates
T Gangaramani
United kingdom
A Joret
P Thornton
United States
J Sumner
C Gregory
Venezuela
J Herrera
62 INTERNATIONAL EGG COMMISSION ANNUAL REVIEW 2012
IEC information
Argentina
Armenia
Australia
Austria
Barbados
Belarus
Belgium
Brazil
Bulgaria
Canada
China
Colombia
Cyprus
Czech Rep
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Guatemala
Hungary
India
Iran
Ireland
Israel
Italy
Japan
Kenya
Korea
Latvia
Luxembourg
Mauritius
Mexico
Mongolia
Morroco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Nigeria
Norway
Pakistan
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Singapore
Slovakia
South Africa
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Thailand
Trinidad and Tobago
Turkey
Ukraine
United Kingdom
United Arab Emirates
USA
Annual Review 2012 Editorial teamIEC member countries
INTERNATIONAL EGG COMMISSION ANNUAL REVIEW 2012 63
director generalMr J MadeleyEmail: [email protected]
business and Events managerMrs C PriceEmail: [email protected]
office and Events managerMiss C FloydEmail: [email protected]
Communications Mrs V Millichamp Email: [email protected]
Statistical AnalystProf H WindhorstEmail: [email protected]
Economic AnalystMr P van HorneEmail: [email protected]
Scientific AdvisorDr V GuyonnetEmail: [email protected]
IEC officeInternational Egg CommissionSecond Floor89 Charterhouse StreetLondon EC1M 6HR, UKTel: +44 (0) 207 490 3493Fax: +44 (0) 207 490 3495
IEC Family tree IEC Staff
director general
Julian Madeley [email protected]
Statistical Analyst
Professor Hans-Wilhelm Windhorst
Economic Analyst
Peter van Horne
office and Events Administrator
Caron Floyd [email protected]
Thanks also to Aline Veauthier and Anna Wilke.
designed and produced by
Lighthouse design for business [email protected]
64 INTERNATIONAL EGG COMMISSION ANNUAL REVIEW 2012
As a part of the egg industry, your business
will increasingly need to be in touch with
what is happening locally, nationally and on
the world stage.
With issues and opportunities happening
fast in today’s global environment, access to
a reliable information stream and talking to
the right people is crucial.
The organisation to facilitate this is The
International Egg Commission - join today.
Call +44 (0) 20 7490 343 or visit the website at www.internationalegg.com
The IEC Support Group provides a unique
opportunity to promote your company
through IEC publications, the IEC website
and through our annual conferences. If
you are interested in joining, please contact
Caron Floyd on +44 (0) 20 7490 3493
TheIECSupportGroupWe would like to thank the following for their support
Interested in joining the IEC Support group? become a member of the IEC
TheInternationalEggCommission89CharterhouseStreetLondon EC1M 6HRUnited Kingdom
Phone:+44(0)2074903493Fax:+44(0)2074903495Email:[email protected]:www.internationalegg.com