12 - International Egg Commission – A World Egg ... · With thanks also to Aline Veauthier and...

12

International Egg CommissionAnnual Review 2012

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


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


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


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



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


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)



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.


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.


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


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.



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.


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


shell eggs

egg products


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$



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)


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).


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]



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.


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


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


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]


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

12 - International Egg Commission – A World Egg ... · With thanks also to Aline Veauthier and...

Documents

Transcript of 12 - International Egg Commission – A World Egg ... · With thanks also to Aline Veauthier and...