Determinants of the competitiveness of Mexican export tomatoes

Authors

  • Ignacio Caamal-Cauich División de Ciencias Económico Administrativas-Universidad Autónoma Chapingo. Carretera México-Texcoco km 38.5, Texcoco, Estado de México, México. CP. 56230
  • Mariana Fonseca-Varela División de Ciencias Económico Administrativas-Universidad Autónoma Chapingo. Carretera México-Texcoco km 38.5, Texcoco, Estado de México, México. CP. 56230
  • Diana América Reyna-Izaguirre División de Ciencias Económico Administrativas-Universidad Autónoma Chapingo. Carretera México-Texcoco km 38.5, Texcoco, Estado de México, México. CP. 56230
  • Verna Gricel Pat-Fernández División de Ciencias Económico Administrativas-Universidad Autónoma Chapingo. Carretera México-Texcoco km 38.5, Texcoco, Estado de México, México. CP. 56230
  • José Antonio Ávila-Dorantes División de Ciencias Económico Administrativas-Universidad Autónoma Chapingo. Carretera México-Texcoco km 38.5, Texcoco, Estado de México, México. CP. 56230

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29312/remexca.v16i6.3810

Keywords:

comparative advantage, exports, multiple linear model, time series

Abstract

Mexico is one of the largest producers and exporters of tomatoes, among other products; the dominant role of this Mexican horticultural product in the international market is due to its competitiveness. The research aimed to analyze the behavior of the competitiveness of the Mexican tomato and identify the main factors that establish the fluctuations in the 1994-2021 period based on a standardized linear regression model. The findings of the research suggest that Mexico has a relative advantage in tomato production and is superior to its closest competitors: Spain and the Netherlands, although with different fluctuations over time. It has presented significant falls in the periods of Mexico’s trade liberalization and the 2007-2008 financial crisis; it is from 2016 when a period of ascent begins, with rates of 4.1% per year. Regarding the determinants of competitiveness, the most important are international unit prices and the carry-over effect of its competitors; a change of one standard deviation, ceteris paribus, was reflected in changes in its export performance ratio of 0.6846 and 0.821, respectively.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abdullahi, N. M.; Zhang, Q.; Shahriar, S.; Kea, S. and Huo, X. 2021. Relative export competitiveness of the nigerian cocoa industry. Competitiveness review: an International Business Journal. 32(6):1025-1046. Doi:10.1108/CR-03-2021-0036.

Balassa, B. 1965. Trade liberalization and ‘revealed’ comparative advantage. The Manchester School. 33(2):99-123.

Banco Mundial. 2023. GDP per cápita. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?locations=MX.

Bierut, B. K. and Kuziemska-Pawlak, K. 2017. Competitiveness and export performance of cee countries. Eastern European Economics. 55(6):522-542. Doi:10.1080/00128775.2017.1382378.

CABC. 2013. Acuerdo de suspensión antidumping al tomate mexicano: guía para exportadores.http://www.cabc.org.mx/docs/preguntasfrecuentes-dumping-guia%20rapida. 1-2 pp.

FAOSTAT. 2023. Estadísticas de cultivos y productos de la ganadería. https://www.fao.org/faostat/es/#data/QCL.

Fetscherin, M.; Alon, I. and Johnson, J. 2010. Assessing the export competitiveness of Chinese industries. Asian Bus Manage. 9(1):401-424. Doi:10.1057/abm.2010.13.

Hapsari, T. T. and Yuniasih, A. F. 2020. The determinant factors of Indonesian competitiveness of cocoa exports. Jurnal Ekonomi Pembangunan. 18(1):75-84. Doi:10.29259/jep.v18i1.9978.

Huo, D.; Yan, C.; Ken, H.; Zening, S.; Jialin, G. and An, J. 2019. Diamond model and the export competitiveness of the agriculture industry from emerging markets: an exploratory vision based on a spatial effect study using a genetic algorithm. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja. 33(1):2427-2443. doi:10.1080/1331677X.2019.1679212.

Kumar, N. R.; Rai, A. B. and Rai, M. 2008. Export of cucumber and gherkin from india: performance, destinations, competitive and determinants. Agricultural Economics Research Review. 21(1):130-138.

Montaño, I. E.; Valenzuela, I. N. y Villavicencio, K. V. 2021. Competitividad del tomate rojo de México en el mercado internacional: análisis 2003-2017. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Agrícolas. 12(7):1185-1197.

Mwansakilwa, C.; Tembo, G. and Mugisha, J. 2013. Growth and competitiveness of non traditional agricultural exports in Zambia. Modern Economy. 04(11):794-808. Doi:10.4236/me.2013.411085.

Nwachukwu, I. N.; Nnanna, A.; Jude, N. and Imonikhe, G. 2010. Competitiveness and determinants of cocoa export from Nigeria. Report and Opinion. 2(7):51-54.

Osuntogun, A.; Edorodu, C. and Oramah, B.1997. Potentials for diversifying nigeria’s non oil exports to non traditional markets. AERC research paper. African Economic Research Consortium, Nairobi, Kenya. 68(1):1-35.

Pratiwi, I. E. 2021. The predictors of Indonesia’s palm oil export competitiveness: a gravity model approach. Journal of International Studies. 14(3):250-262. Doi:10.14254/2071-8330.2021/14-3/16.

SAGARPA. 2017. Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca y Alimentación. Planeación agrícola nacional 2017-2030: Jitomate mexicano. Ciudad de México, México. Sagarpa, Primera edición. 1-20 pp. https://www.gob.mx/cms/uploads/attachment/file/257077/Potencial-Jitomate.pdf.

SE. 2019. Secretaría de Economía. Reporte T-MEC: se logra acuerdo de suspensión sobre tomate fresco 2019-2024. 1-3 pp. https://mipymes.economia.gob.mx/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Reporte-TMEC-n12-esp-20190826-.pdf.

SIE. 2024. Tipo de cambio pesos por dólar EUA. https://www.banxico.org.mx/SieInternet/consultarDirectorioInternetAction.do?sector=6&accion=consultarDirectorioCuadros&locale=es.

Serin, V. and Civan, A. 2008 Revealed comparative advantage and com-petitiveness: a case study and turkey towards the EU. Journal of Economic and Social Research. 10(2):25-41.

Siegel, A. and Wagner, M. 2022. Multiple regression. Elsevier Inc. Practical Business Statistics 8th Ed. 371-394 pp. Doi:10.1016/C2019-0-00330-5.

Soto, H. D. 2018. Análisis de la competitividad del tomate mexicano en el contexto del TLCAN: escenario ante el mercado chino. Rev. Econ. Admin. 15(1):15-31.

Tandra, H.; Suroso, A. I.; Syaukat, Y. and Najib, M. 2022. The determinants of competitiveness in global palm oil trade. Economies. 10(6):132-142. MDPI AG. Doi:10.3390/economies10060132.

US. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2023. Consumer price index for all urban consumers: all items in US. City Average. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CPIAUCSL.

Vollrath, T. L. 1991. A theoretical evaluation of alternative trade intensity measures of revealed comparative advantage. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv. 127(2):265-280.

Published

2025-09-30

How to Cite

Caamal-Cauich, Ignacio, Mariana Fonseca-Varela, Diana América Reyna-Izaguirre, Verna Gricel Pat-Fernández, and José Antonio Ávila-Dorantes. 2025. “Determinants of the Competitiveness of Mexican Export Tomatoes”. Revista Mexicana De Ciencias Agrícolas 16 (6). México, ME:e3810. https://doi.org/10.29312/remexca.v16i6.3810.

Issue

Section

Articles

Most read articles by the same author(s)