Working in the Sphere of Food Trade and Service in Armenia: Patterns of Precariousness

The food trade and service sector is considered to be the most uncertain, with a strong expression of instability both worldwide and in Armenia. Currently, the term precariousness is widely used in the field to describe the uncertainty and risks in the field. Research on food trade and services in Armenia has been conducted recently, but there have been no sociological studies on patterns of precariousness in the field. The study of patterns of precariousness provides an in-depth look at sectoral uncertainty and risk in relation to broader social structures. The purpose of this article is to study the patterns of precariousness expressed in the field through secondary analysis, which will provide opportunities for deeper analysis in the future, emphasizing the expressions of social injustice and inequality.

Research on Global Grain Trade Network Pattern and Its Driving Factors

Trading systems are essential in promoting global food security. With the growing proportion of global food consumption obtained through international trade, the global food trade pattern has become increasingly complex over recent years. This study constructed a weighted global grain network using the trade data of 196 countries in 2000 and 2018 to explore the structure and evolution based on the complex network theory. We established that the global grain network was scale-free. There was significant heterogeneity among nodes, and the heterogeneity of the out-degree was greater than that of the in-degree. The global grain network has a significant core-periphery structure, with the United States, Japan, Mexico, Egypt, South Korea, and Colombia as the core countries. Thereafter, by applying the quadratic assignment procedure model to explore the driving factors of the global grain network, we established that geographical distance had a positive impact on the food trade patterns in 2000 and 2018. This differs from the classical gravity model theory. Furthermore, grain trade had significant “boundary effects”; economic gaps, resource endowment, and regional free trade agreements had a positive impact on the evolution of the grain trade network, whereas cultural similarity and political differences had a negative impact on the grain trade network pattern.

Global Food Security Assessment during 1961–2019

Quantified components of the global food system are used to assess long-term global food security under a series of socio-economic, epidemic normalization and climate change scenarios. Here, we evaluate the global food security including the global farming system as well as the global food trade, reserve and loss systems from 1961 to 2019, and analyze their temporal and spatial characteristics by using the global food vulnerability (GFV) model. The spatio–temporal patterns of the vulnerability of the global food system were consistent with the GFSI. As food production and consumption vary greatly in different countries which have continued for a long time, food exports from many developed agricultural countries have compensated for food shortages in most countries (about 120 net grain-importing countries). As a result, many countries have relied heavily on food imports to maintain their domestic food supplies, ultimately causing the global food trade stability to have an increasing impact on the food security of most countries. The impact of global food trade on global food security increased from 9% to 17% during 1961–2019, which has increased the vulnerability of the global food system. The food damage in the United States, Russia, China, and India has varied significantly, and global cereal stocks have fluctuated even more since 2000. From 1961 to 2019, the food system security of some Nordic countries significantly improved, while the food system security of most African countries significantly deteriorated. Most countries with high food insecurity are located in Africa and South Asia. In order to cope with extreme events, these countries need to strengthen and improve their own food production and storage systems, which will help the World Food and Agriculture Organization to formulate relevant food policies and maintain sustainable development.

Chapter 7: Prospects for Agri-Food Trade Between Russia and China

China features prominently in Russia’s medium-term export targets and is also considered to be an important investment partner for developing agriculture in the Russian Far East. Meanwhile, China is seeking to mitigate economic risks by diversifying import supply channels; Russia features as one such supplier. However, this chapter cautions that the agricultural and food trade relationship remains vulnerable to a range of operational, technical, and policy hurdles. These obstacles dovetail with political imperatives on both sides for self-sufficiency, which limits the scope for trade. Thus, China is and will continue to be an expanding market for Russian agricultural goods, but there are tenuous realities in terms of concrete cooperation.

Chapter 1: Russia’s Foreign Food Trade: An Historical Survey

The chapter utilises four variables to examine Russia’s food trade from the 1970s to the present. The four variables include: frequency of entrance into the global food market; degree of food trade protectionism; degree of integration with Western global trading institutions; and degree of involvement in the global food market. For the period since 2014, the chapter concludes that the frequency of Russia’s entrance into the global food market is likely to remain high as an annual importer and exporter. Agricultural protectionism is likely to remain selectively high. The degree of integration with Western trade institutions is likely to remain low. Russia’s degree of involvement with the global food market is likely to remain high.

Chapter 4: Russia’s Food Security and Impact on Agri-Food Trade

Russia’s food policy has been defined by the quest for food security for more than a decade, which in the Russian context includes import protectionism, self-sufficiency, and import substitution, marked by the adoption of Food Security Doctrines in 2010 and 2020. This chapter first investigates the impact of food security policy on domestic production. Food security policy has combined with an increase in state support for domestic production, leading to notable increases in output and self-sufficiency for selected commodities. The chapter also examines the impact of food security on agri-food exports, which have become a priority since 2018. Although Russia has become a leading exporter of wheat, the influence of food security is seen by the introduction of export quotas on grain starting in 2020. Despite protectionism, Russia has not withdrawn from the international food market but rather is an active and significant player as both food importer and exporter.