Very tight orange market in Europe expected

08.06.2023 500 views

“It’s looking ten times better than last year,” says Snyman Kritzinger, managing director of Grown4U in Kirkwood, and the winter has quickly turned cold, boosting colour development, while high rainfall has helped acids and residue levels to drop.

“The Eastern Cape will start and probably end the earliest with all of its citrus, including late mandarins, in at least thirteen years, which is how long I’ve been here,” he says. “Tangos are now testing perfectly in week 23, so we’ll probably start packing them next week. This week we’re finishing off the Clementine Nules and the Novas.”

However, he points out, one can only pick as fast as packing and cold room capacity allow. Rain, of course, always remains a possible brake on the pace of the citrus campaign.

Late mandarins are in a very good space

China always does well with the early Tangos, Snyman remarks. 

“In the UK, Marks & Spencer, Waitrose and Morrisons all want to start with early Southern Hemisphere Tango and Nadarcott, all of our clients in Europe too, so the first Tangos will be spread widely.”

Clementines and Novas often run later, he says, overlapping with late mandarins, but they’ve been early too, and will segue nicely into the late mandarins.

Asian demand for late mandarins now outpaces growth

Late mandarins have course-corrected after a poor year in 2020 when exporters went finding new homes for them - and it’s paid off.

“Southern Hemisphere soft citrus producers have achieved an increase in mandarin consumption in countries like India, the Philippines, Thailand and Malaysia. We’ve awakened an appetite for this product, and South Africa probably played the largest role in calling late mandarin demand to life in Asia.”

He adds that explains why mandarin prices remain high, despite the tremendous growth in volumes which, a few years back, easily came to 50% year on year.

“Over the past two years the volume growth has flattened off, but meanwhile demand for mandarins from Asian countries keeps growing at a steady pace, now higher than the growth pace. So at the moment we’re undersupplying, just with much greater volumes.”

The demand is natural, he comments: once you’ve eaten a Tango or a Nadorcott, it sells itself.

This year Grown4U will also offer Leanri mandarins for the first time.

“Late mandarins are probably of the most price-elastic citrus products available, much more so than lemons. When you want three lemons, you’re not going to buy double because it’s on promotion but you’d still buy three even when it’s expensive."

There have been one or two weeks with large arrivals of South African clementines and Novas in Europe .

“There is always the risk of a downturn in the soft citrus market during the long European summer holidays, particularly when weather heats up,” he says, remarking that the market has crashed before during this time.

“But this year the market has been so low, and Peru has sent so much less and is so much later - I don’t think we’ll continue to see the prices of the past six weeks but I also don’t think the market will crash.”

"Unjust" phytosanitary rules limiting to citrus trade

The orange price has slightly nodded downwards from what, he says, has been a very high level.

“The orange market I think will only get stronger until August arrivals.”

The Spanish and Moroccan orange crops were lower, Egypt is ending much earlier than expected with very small sizes this year and so, he says, there’s huge opportunity for oranges in Europe and probably the shortest market in Europe in many years. 

Their early navels are packed and on the water; Grown4U’s first container will arrive in China on 19 June and before that in Europe.

Their Valencia season starts in week 25, also a week or so earlier.

He observes that the new cooling protocol to Europe and stricter phytosanitary rules put a limit on what can go to Europe which is challenging, he admits, but also keeps the market from being oversupplied.

“The old saying “be careful what you wish for” is coming into play. Unfair and unjust implementation of certain phytosanitary regulations pushed for by the minority in Europe is now starting to regulate the supply to such an extent that Europe will be short supplied especially on oranges, and unfortunately everyone in Europe will pay the price for these unjustified actions or vendettas of a few.”

Eastern Cape: light late flower lemon crop
For the same reason the European lemon market will remain stable for the whole of the South African campaign, he expects, compounded by low Spanish Verna supplies and Argentina’s extremely late and small-sized lemon crop.

“Currently we are seeing a steady supply of lemons into Europe. It is still well below the million carton per week shipping barrier which, in the past, would be the trigger for the market to get nervous, like after two or three consecutive weeks of more than a million cartons per week being shipped.”

He continues: “After spending time in the orchards last week, I realized that the Eastern Cape, which is the main lemon producing area in South Africa, has a very light late flower crop. By the end of July there will be at most 10 to 15% of the lemon crop left to be harvested and the Sundays River Valley, the lemon season will finish very early this year.”

If the sizing is right – counts 64 up to a 100 – such lemons can go to Russia but the market is not performing fantastically, Snyman notes, even though there’s not a lot of fruit.

One gets the feeling, he comments, that the Russian economy and currency are now starting to feel the strain of the ongoing war.

Favourable exchange rate for exports
He notes a slight relief of freight rates for exporters, and it’s shifting back to normal levels prior to Covid.

“With the exchange rate at its current level the grower can get R1,000 more per tonne, in Rand terms, just as a result of the exchange rate. It could change tomorrow," he remarks, "but it’s unlikely. We’re grateful for it but it will most likely have an effect on input costs for next year’s crop.”

Source - https://www.freshplaza.com

21.10.2025

Uzbekistan Launches National Project to Insure Horticultural Farmers with Support from International Partners

Representatives of the Ministry of Agriculture of Uzbekistan held a working meeting with members of the Insurance Development Forum (IDF) to discuss the implementation stages and prospects of the project “Agricultural Insurance for Horticultural Farmers in Uzbekistan.”

21.10.2025

Ethiopia - Pastoralists in Borana say livestock insurance failed them after drought losses

The pastoralist communities who purchased livestock insurance to safeguard their herds despite making payments have not received compensation for losses, saying, “The insurance we bought has not paid us.” Zonal and Oromia officials, however, maintain that payouts were implemented.

21.10.2025

USDA announces changes to livestock insurance programs for 2026, subsequent years

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Risk Management Agency approved changes to improve insurance coverage for American livestock producers. These updates will take effect for the Livestock Risk Protection, Livestock Gross Margin, and Dairy Revenue Protection insurance programs beginning with the 2026 crop year.

21.10.2025

Low awareness, product gaps limit livestock insurance coverage in India

Livestock insurance remains an underutilised safety net for India’s rural households, despite its potential to protect millions of small and marginal farmers from unexpected losses. Limited awareness, low customisation, and rising climate risks continue to expose rural livelihoods to shocks.

21.10.2025

Canada - Beef farmers want fair shake for livestock price insurance

The government cost shares funding for crop insurance; beef producers say livestock insurance options should get the same treatment.Livestock producers face a fundamental inequality when it comes to business risk management (BRM) programs in Canada — but industry groups are proposing a fix.One of the starkest differences is in government-based insurance programs. Crop producers enjoy coverage that’s typically subject to a 60/40 government/producer split, with provincial and federal governments picking up the largest part of the tab.Organizations such as the Canadian Cattle Association are calling on the feds and provinces to share the cost of pricey livestock price insurance (LPI) premiums with beef producers along the same lines, says Tyler Fulton, president of the CCA, who also serves as co-chair of the association’s foreign trade committee.That would bring some equivalency to these BRM programs, says Fulton. Crop insurance covers yield loss, the biggest risk for crop growers. Meanwhile, downward market shifts — which LPI insures by allowing cattle producers to set a minimum price floor — present the greatest risk for those farmers.Much of the new interest in LPI is in response to the threat of US tariffs, he says. Many LPI policy holders intend to use it as a tool to manage them should livestock and meat ever be targeted.“By virtue of the fact that we sell 50 per cent to export of what we produce here in Canada, we are very reliant on the export markets to help determine our price,” says Fulton.“And so when we see the tariff threats of 25 per cent it represents probably one of the biggest risks that we could experience, bar none. It’s just very significant because the U.S. represents such a large market for Canadian beef and live cattle.”An LPI cost-share agreement would also be a relative bargain compared to the government’s cost of supporting crop insurance premiums, he says. Crop insurance requires several billion dollars in government support while a similar model of support for LPI would be closer to $150 million to $200 million, said Fulton.Although he says the federal government is coming around to the idea of LPI cost-sharing, it has previously cited trade risk and prohibitive cost as reasons to not participate.Fulton doesn’t think those arguments hold water in an environment already brimming with trade risk from U.S. tariffs, especially with many beef producers still priced out of the LPI market.“It’s really frustrating that we can’t effectively cover the risk because the government says that it’s too risky in this environment.”Ultimately, beef and crop production are related but separate ag sectors with their own specific needs, says Fulton, and a perceived “one size fits all” philosophy driving government-funded BRMs isn’t cutting it.”I think that we need to move to a model that is more industry-specific. It’s really difficult, if not impossible, to design a safety net program or a risk management program that works well for all sectors of agriculture.”Brian English, a beef producer from Rivers, Man. who runs a cow-calf, feeder and backgrounding operation at nearby Bradwardine, took out an LPI for the first time this year. He also highlights the government’s treatment of crop growers compared to beef producers.“Why shouldn’t we get the same benefits as these guys that are putting in thousands of acres of cropland?” he said. “We should be on equal footing as them. The federal and provincial governments should do the same funding schedule for livestock price insurance as they do for crop insurance now.”English took out an LPI policy this year in response to the threat of U.S. tariffs.“Trump had put on the tariffs for two-and-a-half days (and) we heard the horror stories of the cattle crossing the line getting $1,000 tariffs on each animal. And then (the U.S.) stopped that for a brief period of time and there was a chance that it was going to come back on right away.”LPI has historically been a hard sell to beef producers due to policy cost. Fulton estimates a high rate of $50-$60 per calf for a calf policy (the program has three cattle policies available: calf, feeder and fed) on a 10-year margin.However, thanks to high prices in all cattle categories in recent years, margins are much better today. That offers extra incentive to take out an LPI policy because beef producers will have more to lose once the bull market (in investment terms) goes bearish, he says.“$50 to $60 in today’s market is not as significant. It’s not as big a barrier, but it’s still a large barrier when talking about an individual animal (and) having to pay $50 or $60 just to be able to cover it.“If you get 60 per cent of the cost of your insurance policy covered, it really changes the motivation and the desire to actually cover off that risk because you’re not using up a bunch of your profit margin just to insure it.”Beef cattle graze in a pasture in Saskatchewan. Photo: Michael RobinOther LPI changes neededFulton would also like to see a widening of LPI’s application window. Although applications for feeder and fed policies are accepted year-round, calf policies are only available from February to June each year. However, risk exposure continues long past June.“So for most of the year the tool is not accessible.” English has a technology-based suggestion for improving the program. He says the application website needs to be more user-friendly for cell phone users and especially those who live in areas with limited internet bandwidth.“It’s just a little daunting the first time that you’re (applying) … It’s kind of clunky. It’s not iPhone friendly and I do everything on my phone.“We put all our records of our cattle on our phone, check on our weather. Everyone uses their phones more than a laptop and so I think if they made it so that it was a little easier to use on your phone, it’d be that much easier also.”Balanced outcomesThere could be some positive tradeoffs with other government BRMs if a cost-share arrangement for LPI is developed, says Fulton. For example, AgriStability payments wouldn’t trigger as easily if beef producers already had coverage through LPI.(AgriStability is a federal-provincial-territorial program meant to protect farmers from extreme market price declines that threaten the viability of their farms.)“Let’s say a 20 per cent tariff is implemented by President Trump and our prices here in Canada drop by 15 to 20 per cent. That would likely trigger a payment in AgriStability normally,” explains Fulton.“But if we had coverage with livestock price insurance, for those that had a policy it would result in a payment through livestock price insurance and therefore would not result in a drop in your farm income and consequently you wouldn’t need to trigger an AgriStability claim.”It’s a scenario Canadian crop producers already enjoy, he says.“Because people have crop insurance, they can experience a 40 per cent hit in their yield (and) they get a payment through their crop insurance policy. They don’t make an AgriStability claim because they’re already covered off through their insurance.”Government willing to talkThe beef industry is slowly but surely catching the ear of government on cost-shared LPI policies. Fulton says both the federal Conservative and Liberal parties — motivated in part by U.S. tariff threats — were interested in providing better risk management tools to farmers prior to the federal election.“This represents a cattle industry-developed program that works really well and so when we started to get exposed to the tariff issues, it really changed the conversation. It just made it very obvious that there was a deficiency here and they identified that.”Fulton has spoken with new federal Agriculture and Agri-Food Minister Heath MacDonald and hopes to meet with him soon to address the uncertainty and risk the industry is facing. He’s counting on the Prince Edward Island-dwelling MacDonald having an understanding of LPI, given Maritime producers have been eligible since last year.Countervail fearsAn attendee of Manitoba Ag’s Navigating Livestock Price Insurance webinar on May 8 asked if cost-shared premiums would trigger countervail action from the U.S. The answer is “unequivocally no,” says Fulton.“The industry is not at all concerned about a countervail duty related to livestock price insurance cost-shared premiums,” he says.“Our American counterparts have a very similar program that is cost-shared and it is really structured similarly to their crop insurance program, and so they’re addressing what they’ve identified to be a gap in risk management tools offered for farmers and inequity for livestock operations.”Source - Manitoba Cooperator