Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
This important DGC Asset Management (DGC) legal notice should be reviewed carefully prior to reading the contents of this document. Jurisdiction The information in this document may contain material which could be interpreted by the relevant authorities in the country in which you are based, or of which you are a resident, as a financial promotion or an offer to purchase a controlled investment. Accordingly, the information in this document is only intended to be viewed by persons who fall outside the scope of any law that seeks to regulate financial promotions in the country of your residence or in the country in which this document is being read. If you are uncertain about your position under the laws of the country of which you are a resident or in which this document is being read then you should seek clarification by obtaining legal advice from a lawyer practicing in the country of your residence or in the country in which this document is being read. You must confirm that you are eligible to read the information contained in this document pursuant to all applicable laws within your country of residence or the country in which the document is being read. There are certain legal and regulatory limitations that may apply to the information contained in this document and by reading it you are deemed to have read and understood this warning. In reading this document, you are expressly stating your belief that the information it contains falls outside the scope of any law that seeks to regulate financial promotions in the country in which you are reading the document or in which you are a resident and that by reading this document you will not contravene, or cause DGC to contravene, any such law. Information and Liability Although DGC has used its best efforts in preparing this document, we make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of its contents. DGC specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. DGC have no fiduciary duty to you, the reader of this document, unless expressly agreed, and assume no responsibility to advise on, and makes no representation as to the appropriateness or possible consequences of, any action you may take with respect to any information contained herein. DGC shall not be held liable for any loss, loss of profit or any other damages, including but not limited to, special, incidental, consequential, or other damages. This document may contain certain information that is forward looking and, by its nature, such forward-looking information is subject to important risks and uncertainties. The words: anticipate expect may should estimate project outlook forecast or other similar words are used to identify such forward looking information. Those forward-looking statements
herein made by DGC, if any, are given as of the date they are expressed herein and reflect DGCs beliefs and assumptions based on information available at the time the statements were made (including, without limitation, that (i) the demand for essential commodities such as timber will continue to grow at a pace that is unlikely to be matched by growth in agricultural productivity, and (ii) investment demand for tangible assets such as agricultural commodities, farmland and timberland properties will continue to increase for the foreseeable future. Actual results or events may differ from those anticipated or predicted in these forward-looking statements, and the differences may be material. Factors which could cause actual results or events to differ materially from current expectations include, among other things: risks associated with the ownership and operation of agricultural property assets, including fluctuations in interest rates, rental rates and vacancy rates; general economic conditions; local real estate markets; supply and demand for agricultural properties; competition for available agricultural properties; weather; crop diseases; the price of grain and other agricultural commodities such as timber or feedstock for biofuel production; changes in legislation and the regulatory environment; and international trade and global political conditions (for more information on risks, please see the Risk Factors section in the final pages of this document. Although it is believed that the expectations conveyed by the forward-looking information contained (if any) are reasonable based on information available at the date such statements were made, no assurance can be given as to future results or events and so readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on any forwardlooking information contained in this presentation (if any). All forward looking information, whether written or oral, are expressly qualified in their entirety by these cautionary statements. DGC undertakes no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking information, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. Neither this document nor any of its contents constitute an offer, recommendation, or solicitation to any person to enter into any transaction or adopt any hedging, trading or investment strategy, nor does it constitute any prediction of likely future movements in rates or prices or any representation that any such future movements will either exceed or not exceed those shown in any text or illustration herein. No information provided in this document in relation to any product or investment should be construed as advice on the suitability or otherwise of that product or investment to any person, such suitability depending on all the circumstances of the person concerned. Nothing contained in this document constitutes financial, investment, legal, tax or any other advice nor is it to be relied on in making an investment or any other decision. You, the reader of this document, are to make your own independent judgment with respect to any matter contained herein and to seek your own independent professional advice where appropriate.
_________________________________________________________________________________
A report from DGC Asset Management designed to provide interested parties with an insight into the characteristics, benefits and risks associated with farmland considered as an investable asset class.
This report has been prepared by David Garner. David is a Partner at DGC Asset Management, and this report is designed to offer an introduction to productive agricultural land as an asset class, as well as its current potential as a property-based alternative investment. The report has been constructed utilising rigorous academic standards and references a wide range of research sources which are all quoted in the reference section. UK Investors should seek the advice of an authorised Independent Financial Advisor with experience of the asset class before committing to any investment. DGC work directly with Investors and Advisors, providing detailed information on the portfolio risks associated with Farmland Investment, particularly in the United Kingdom, Australia and Latin America, as well as offering a range of farmland assets and agricultural productivity joint ventures for Investors
_________________________________________________________________________________
Contents
Executive Summary 1. An Introduction to Farmland 2. Investment Fundamentals
2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 5.1 5.2 Population growth Dietary Shift Agricultural productivity Climate Change Biofuels Farmland Availability Capital preservation Inflation hedging Income Total returns The recessionary hedge Portfolio diversification Simplicity and security Tax incentives United Kingdom North America South America Europe Asia Africa Summary Let land Greenfield development General investment risk Commodity prices General agricultural risk Geographic risk Liquidity Regulatory risk Inflation / Deflation Currency risk Counterparty risk Asset specific risk
3. Investment Characteristics
4. Investment Performance
5. Investment Strategies
6. Risks
6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9 6.10
8. Summary
_________________________________________________________________________________
Executive Summary
The global financial crisis that began on January 3rd 2007 with the Chapter 11 Bankruptcy filing of Ownit Mortgage Solutions owing Merrill Lynch around $93 million, has since claimed a number of high-profile casualties including the economies of Iceland, Ireland and Greece, and continues to this day with on-going uncertainty over the future of the major Eurozone economies of Spain, Italy and even the United States. Under currently prevailing market conditions, many Investors are reducing their exposure to equities, and seeking alternative assets to boost returns without dramatically altering their overall risk profile. The current environment for investors can be categorised by: 1. 2. 3. 4. Economic uncertainty (poor visibility). Price volatility in mainstream assets. Concerns over inflation. Poor returns on cash deposits.
Consequently, Investors are seeking alternative investment assets that display the following characteristics: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Tangible assets that retain capital value. Simple, secure investments involving direct ownership of underlying tangible assets. Assets that generate tax-efficient income to replace lost risk-free income. Low or zero correlation to financial markets. Capital growth supported by solid fundamental trends.
Productive agricultural land displays all of these characteristics, making this unique asset class a popular tool amongst Institutional Investors with which to diversify investment portfolios, reduce overall risk, hedge inflation, generate income & growth, and in many cases, improve tax efficiency. Billions of institutional investment dollars are being allocated to farmland assets by a number of large Institutional Investors and Sovereign Wealth Funds which continue to acquire large farm properties all over the world including; AP2 (Sweden), ABP (Netherlands), APG (Netherlands), ATP (Denmark), BT Pension Scheme (UK), Hermes EOS (UK), PGGM (Netherlands), TIAA-CREF (US), Ascension Health, (USA), CalPERS (California Public Employees Retirement System), Dow Chemical (USA), New Zealand Superannuation Fund, and PGGM (Pension Fund for Care and Well-Being), Netherlands. This report provides an overview for Investors considering agricultural land as an addition to a welldiversified portfolio, covering the fundamentals that drive investment performance, characteristics of the asset class, and risks associated with various modes of investment.
_________________________________________________________________________________
1. An Introduction to Farmland
Farmland investments are essentially simple property transactions, involving the acquisition and possibly development of land with agricultural potential for the production of crops or livestock. Investors may choose to acquire productive land which is either leased to a tenant farmer, or may choose to engage in a more participatory role, sharing in harvest revenues under a Contract Farming Agreement (CFA). Another strategy that has proven exceptionally profitable in emerging markets involves the acquisition of land with agricultural potential and adding value through conversion into productive agricultural assets, including investing in onfarm infrastructure such as roads, storage and irrigation. Farmland investments present a two-fold opportunity to capture superior risk and inflation-adjusted returns. Unlike other physical assets considered an inflation hedge such as gold, farmland generates annual income, and capital values are driven by demand for agricultural commodities rather than the dynamics of financial markets. This makes farmland investing particularly attractive to Investors wishing to hold productive assets that are not affected by volatility in financial market. These characteristics make farmland a useful portfolio diversification and optimisation tool, allowing Investors and Financial Planners to dissipate volatility, generate income and hedge inflation, whilst also reducing the overall risk profile of a portfolio. Specific expertise is required during the farmland acquisition and due diligence process, not only in order to identify effective investment strategy, taking into account asset mix (crop choice), business strategy (development opportunities) and deal structure (farming agreements). Historically, the best financial gains have been derived from the development of previously unused land into productive agricultural properties through the establishment of transport infrastructure, irrigation and soil quality controls. Not only does this strategy add substantial capital value to land assets, but also generates an annual income stream which can be re-invested or utilised to cover the cost of development financing. Emerging markets in close proximity to high-growth, highdemand markets in Asia, Africa and Latin America offer the most potential for Investors. Over 80% of future food and energy demand will come from the developing world; therefore Investors in control of productive agricultural assets capable of supplying products to meet that demand will be best-positioned to capture financial returns driven by population expansion and rising incomes.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Investment Fundamentals
The primary drivers underpinning current and future farmland values are economic growth, personal income, and population growth, all of which ultimately dictate global demand for food, feed and fuel. In the long term, demand for agricultural commodities is therefore expected to increase in line with growth in these key drivers. Commodity prices, location and productivity all play a part in supporting agricultural land values in the short term, as Farmers and Investors are prepared to pay more to acquire or lease land that is most productive and accessible, and therefore most profitable. In the long-term however, increasing demand for agricultural commodities in the face of a finite stock of suitable productive land will continue to push asset price forwards in line with, or faster than the rate of inflation, whilst also generating incomes with closer ties to global demographics than financial markets. The simple fact is that demand for productive land is resultant of demand for agricultural commodities, and as demand rises, so too do values. When also considering that supply of productive land cannot be increased, this creates the potential for exponential growth in value as capital competes for the most productive assets.
_________________________________________________________________________________
225,000
Daily global population growth
400%
Population growth in 100 years
100%
Grain demand growth by 2050
_________________________________________________________________________________
Consumption of meat is expected to rise by up to 100% by 2050 in many emerging market economies. Demand for grains for use as animal feed will increase, therefore so too will demand for arable land on which to grow them.
_________________________________________________________________________________
As meat production now depends on grain as a key input, any increase in demand for meat results in an acceleration of demand for arable and grazing land area. At least 3540% of all cereal produced in 2008 was used as feed for livestock (FAO, 2006, Livestocks long shadow). This leaves an estimated 43% of cereal production available for human consumption after losses from harvest, postharvest and distribution are taken into account. In percentage terms, the effect of increased income on diets is greatest among lower and middle-income populations which currently consume the lowest percentage of animal products (Devine. R., 2003, La consommation des produits carns, INRA). This indicates great potential for increased meat demand on a global basis given that lowincome countries which account for 5.1 billion of the worlds population consume less than half as much meat (as a percentage of dietary energy intake) as high-income countries which account for only 1.3 billion of the worlds population (FAO, 2008, The state of food insecurity in the world 2008). According to the UN FAO, consumption of animal products per capita in industrialised nations will increase modestly from 825 kcals per person per day today, to just fewer than 900 kcals per person per day by 2050. Yet in East Asia meat consumption is expected to rise from around 400 Kcals per person per day to around 625 Kcals per person per day, an increase of over 56%. Meat consumption in South Asia meanwhile is expected to double from 200 Kcals to 400Kcals (Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, 2006).
35-40%
Proportion of global grains production used for animal feed
7kg
Amount of grain required to produce 1kg of beef
100%
Increase in meat calories consumed in South Asia by 2050
_________________________________________________________________________________
1.1%
Annual global population growth
0.5%
Annual increase in agricultural yields
1 Billion
Amount of people currently undernourished
_________________________________________________________________________________
15%
Decline in South African wheat production by 2030
27%
Decline in South African maize production by 2030
1000%
Increase in natural disasters between 1960 and 2008
extreme effects of climate change would only just be emerging (Lobell et al. (2008). Prioritizing climate change adaptation needs for food security in 2030). The Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations states: The current scenarios of losses and constraints due to climate change and environmental degradation with no policy change - suggest that production increases could fall to 0.87% towards 2030 and only 0.5% between 20302050 (UN Environment Programme Rapid Response Assessment, 2009, The Environmental Food Crisis: The environments role in averting future food Crises).
_________________________________________________________________________________
2.5 Biofuels
Increasing demand for oil in the face of dwindling natural resources and the resultant rise in oil prices has the potential to be the most significant source of uncertainty for agricultural commodity prices. As agricultural production both consumes and produces energy, agricultural and energy markets have always adjusted to each other, with output and consumption rising or falling in response to changing relative prices. Rapidly increasing demand for biofuels is now tying agriculture and energy more closely than ever. There are two reasons for this correlation; firstly higher oil prices drive demand for alternative fuels which require feedstock such as corn or maize produced on agricultural land. Secondly, oil and natural gas are key agricultural inputs and as such, fluctuations in price and availability of fossil fuels could have a major impact on agricultural economics and productivity. As biofuel use expands, this will add further upward pressure to feedstock prices and consequently, the value of the land on which they are produced (Banse et al., 2008, Will EU biofuel policies affect global agricultural markets? European Review of Agricultural Economics). According to a 2009 report from the United Nations: Biofuels could have a significant impact on food prices if oil prices remain high or the cost of biofuels production declines (United Nations Environment Programme Rapid Response Assessment, 2009, The Environmental Food Crisis: The environments role in averting future food crises). As the 2009 joint OECD United Nations report, Agricultural Outlook 2008-2017, puts it: The nature and composition of demand, on the other hand, are factors that may increase the future variability in world prices. As discussed, industrial demand for grains and oilseeds such as for the production of biofuels constitutes a growing share of total use. This demand is generally considered less responsive to prices than traditional food and feed demand. The prolific demand for maize arising from the rapidly expanding ethanol sector in the United States has profoundly affected the coarsegrain market. By 2017, approximately 40% of the countrys maize crop could be destined for energy production. However, overall there will be constraints in expanding new arable areas in many countries and competition for land and resources among grain and oilseed crops is set to intensify with those crops offering the highest returns gaining the most ground. Biofuel production (including bioethanol and biodiesel) is expanding rapidly as a number of countries attempt to deal with energy security concerns in an era of high oil prices and diminishing reserves of crude oil. Legislation and policies to promote biofuel production and use, whether through mandate or subsidy, will lead to greater purchases of feed-stocks for biofuel production. The US is the largest producer and consumer of bioethanol, followed by Brazil which now uses 2.7 million ha of land for biofuels production, equivalent to 4.5% of its cropland
_________________________________________________________________________________
area, mainly planted to sugar cane. Globally, biofuels including bioethanol (mainly from sugarcane and corn) and biodiesel (mainly from soybean, palm oil and other oil seed crops), accounted for roughly 1% of total fuel consumption for road transport in 2005 and it may reach 25% by 2050. The EU has set a target of 10% of all land transport fuels to come from biofuels by 2020. (World Bank, 2008, Rising Food and Fuel Prices: Addressing the Risks to Future Generations) | FAO, 2008, The state of food and agriculture 2008). To put this into perspective, a 2006 report from Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations suggested that for the EU to meet its 10 per cent target from home-grown biofuels would require a staggering 70% of arable land to be taken out of food production, necessitating a huge increase in EU food imports. (Telegraph Online, 12 July 2008, The Great Biofuels Con). According to a recent OECD report, under current policies, areas for biofuel crops are projected to increase by 242% between 2005 and 2030 (OECD, 2008, OECD Environmental Outlook to 2030). The OECD has forecast scenarios for future increases in the allocation of land to growing biofuel feed-crops. Their model predicts that the proportion of cropland dedicated to biofuels will increase from 0.5% in 2008 to 2% by 2030 (range 13%) and 5% by 2050 (range 28%) (United Nations Environment Programme Rapid Response Assessment, February 2009, The Environmental Food Crisis: The environments role in averting future food crises). The higher the oil price, the more economically viable biofuel production becomes (even without subsidies or climate change mitigation
incentives) and the greater will be the competition for cropland. At oil prices above the $50 mark, biofuel production becomes capable of producing significant profits thus creating stiff competition and forcing up the price of maize, wheat and other feedstock crops. An OECD-FAO report forecasts that food prices will rise by between 20% and 50% by 2016, partly as a result of biofuels (OECD, 2008, Rising Food Prices, Causes and Consequences).
40%
Proportion of US maize harvest used for bioethanol production
242%
Increase in the amount of land dedicated to biofuel by 2030
20-50%
Percentage rise in food prices between 2008 and 2016
_________________________________________________________________________________
14.5 million
Hectares of farmland lost to urbanisation in China 1979-1995
35,000Km
Amount of farmland lost to soil degradation every year
3
Number of United Kingdoms in farmland volume lost by 2050
a total of 40 million hectares of cropland would be lost by 2030, and another 27 million by 2050 (Stehfest et al. (2008). Climate benefits of changing diet, Climatic Change, in press). This is a total of 670,000 km2, an area of land 849 times the size of New York City, 424 times the size of Greater London, 1.2 times the size of France and just under 3 times the size of the United Kingdom. China alone lost more than 14.5 million ha of arable land to urbanisation between 1979 and 1995 (ICIMOD (2008). Food Security in the Hindu Kush-Himalayan Region. ICIMOD, Chengdu). As urban sprawl continues to consume and destroy agricultural assets, the value of existing productive farmland will continue to rise.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Soil Degradation Degradation of soil is also a major contributory factor limiting farmland expansion. To date, deforestation and inappropriate agricultural practices have resulted in approximately 2 billion hectares of agricultural land becoming degraded (Pinstrup-Andersen, P. and PandyaLorch, R., 1998, Food security and sustainable use of natural resources: A 2020 Vision, Ecological Economics). This includes an absolute decline, measured by satellite imagery between 1981 and 2003, of 12% of the global productive land area (Bai et al., 2007, Land cover change and soil fertility decline in tropical regions. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry). Some estimates suggest that at current rates up to 30% of all agricultural land will be unusable by 2020 (Investment and Pensions Europe, 2007, The answer lies in the soil. Spotlight on: Alternatives). Annually, the global rate of land degradation, which is due chiefly to soil erosion, is estimated to be between 20,000 and 50,000 km2. To put this in perspective, taking an
average annual loss rate of 35,000 km2 equates to 95 km2 per day or 1,109 m2 per second. This means an area roughly the size of Tokyo, Singapore or New York City is lost every week or one International Football Association standard size football pitch every 7 seconds. Also, due to overgrazing, compaction and erosion from livestock, some 70% of all grazing land in dry areas is considered degraded (FAO, 2006, Livestocks long shadow). As a February 2009 report by the United Nations on the worsening global food crisis puts it: Environmental degradation and loss of ecosystem services will directly affect pests (weeds, insects and pathogens), soil erosion and nutrient depletion, growing conditions through climate and weather, as well as available water for irrigation through impacts on rainfall and ground and surface water. These are factors that individually could account for over 50% in loss of the yield in a given bad year.
_________________________________________________________________________________
2. Investment Characteristics
Farmland assets display a number of investment characteristics that are particularly appealing under prevailing market conditions. Values have been shown to increase at a faster pace than the rate of inflation; values have proven resilient under all market conditions; and investment returns have been shown to show a low or even negative correlation with the performance of traditional investment assets. As farmland values are supported for the most part by a growing demand for the commodities produced, Institutional Investors acquire farmland as a safe, long-term investment asset that generates income and is unlikely to depreciate when the value of other investments fall.
_________________________________________________________________________________
3.3 Income
Farmland investments generate income for investors either through lease payments collected from tenant farmers, or as a percentage of harvest revenues under a jointventure between landowner and farming operator known as a Contract Farming Agreement (CFA). Farmland enjoys a near 100% tenant occupancy rate as demand for quality farmland is always high, regardless of the economic environment; ensuring farmland incomes remain stable throughout all market conditions further dissipating income volatility within a diversified investment portfolio. CFA arrangements carry more risk than simple lease agreements with fixed annual payments as the investor is exposed to commodity prices and agricultural yields, therefore benefiting from good times and sacrificing returns when conditions are less attractive. Yields vary depending on location, business strategy and a host of other endogenous factors that affect agricultural economics and farmland profitability. In the United Kingdom, average annual yields constitute only 1.66% of land values (DEFRA, 2011), whilst in other markets where asset prices are lower, rental yields can stretch to 8%. Under perfect circumstances, Contract Farming Agreements can generate annual yields of up to 20% in many regions including Australia, Latin America, Africa and Asia, whilst in less than perfect conditions it is possible for investors to turn a negative yield if harvest revenues are insufficient to cover the cost of inputs and labour.
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
4. Investment Performance
As previously mentioned within this document, farmland investments capture both capital growth and income. Lower but more stable income is achieved through rentals, and higher, but potentially more volatile returns are achieved through exposure to harvest revenues as part of a joint venture. Farmland returns in emerging markets also tend to outperform more mature markets due to lower asset prices, lower labour costs and in many cases, more fertile land and better growing conditions. In the developed world, a range of official indices track the performance of farmland as an asset class, considering both income and growth, whilst information in emerging markets is often incomplete and less reliable.
4.1
United Kingdom
According to the Index, farmland investments in the UK have delivered returns of 8.2% per year on average for 30 years; 12% per year over 5 years; and 6.3% per year over the past three years.
The investment performance of agricultural land in the United Kingdom has outpaced that of a number of other assets, delivering a higher return with less volatility. In fact, according to research undertaken by Savills, leased agricultural land generated an average return of 14% per year over 15 years with volatility indicators of only 8%, whereas equities generated a return of only 8% per year over the same period with an associated volatility of over 18%. (Savills Agricultural Land Market Survey 2011) There are a number of anecdotal indices published by rural estate agents that indicate land values; however the most relevant measure of the investment performance of operated agricultural land in the United Kingdom outside of the Land Registry is the IPD UK Rural Investment Index. This Index measures ungeared total returns to direct investment in a sample of tenanted farm land. At December 2010 the sample consisted of 541,492 known acres of land on 488 estates with a total capital value of just over 2.2 billion and the total return was 9.0%.
8.2%
Average annual UK farmland investment returns over 30 years
12%
Average annual UK farmland investment returns over 5 years
6.3%
Average annual UK farmland investment returns over 3 years
_________________________________________________________________________________
4.2
North America
while the Kansas City District reports farmland prices up 20%. Nebraska has seen one of the largest increases, with non-irrigated land up 30%. Oklahoma ranchland suffered from a prolonged drought, and values were up just 6.4%. What little value-increase there was, was driven by oil and gas exploration. There has been some concern amongst the agricultural community in the United States that land values have spiralled out of control, with demand for assets fuelled almost entirely by Investors seeking to diversify out of the stock market and into tangible assets. Don McCabe, an accredited farm manager with Soy Capital Ag Services said recently at an investment forum that, about 60% of all farmland is being purchased by active operators, with 15% purchased by nonlocal investors, 13% by local area investors, 7% by institutions and investment groups and 5% by other entities. In Canada, Farm Credit Canada (FCC) monitors the value of a basket of 245 benchmark farm properties every six months. On average, Canadian farmland increased 7.4% in the first six months of 2011, and 9.5% for the year ending June 2011. Saskatchewan farmland led the nation in farmland price increases, up 11.6% in the six months ending in June, and up 14.3% year on year. New York-based TIAA-CREF, the largest U.S. pension manager for teachers and academic researchers with $469 billion of assets said in October 2011 that farmland investments may return 8% to 12% per year as global food demand increases. The company has $2.5 billion invested in farmland and owns about 600,000 hectares.
The primary measure of farmland investment performance in the United States is the National Council of Real Estate Investment Fiduciaries (NCREIF) Farmland Returns Index. The index provides investors with a measure of the investment performance of a large pool of individual agricultural properties acquired in the private market for investment purposes. According to the index, US farmland returned 8.6% in 2010, and 5.85% to quarter 3 in 2011.
10.8 %
Average annual US farmland investment returns over 19 years
7.4%
Increase in Canadian farm values in the first six month of 2011
5.85%
Increase in US farmland values to Q3 in 2011
Regional U.S. farmland growth figures vary from state to state. A new report by the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City showed a 12.6% increase in mountain states farmland values over 2011. The Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank District reported farmland values as of second quarter 2011 up 17% from the same period a year ago,
_________________________________________________________________________________
11 %
Average increase in Argentinian farmland values in 2011
10-15%
Average increase in Brazilian farmland values in 2011
_________________________________________________________________________________
4.4
Europe
2.4%, Hungary with 8.17%, Greece with 2.4% and Turkey with 0.78%, whereas Malta, Cyprus, Monaco, San Marino and Luxembourg have acquired 5.91% of Romanias agricultural land through offshore companies. Land owners in Iraq, Lebanon, Syria and Iran are present from the Arab world. In a recent paper published by Institute for Economic Research and Policy Consulting, farmland values in the Ukraine were assessed using the income capitalization approach to farmland price estimation. Based on the actual land productivity (gross margins) for Ukrainian farms over the period of 2007-2009, researchers found that a hectare of arable land would be traded from 1500 UAH (Zakarpattia) to 5500 UAH (Kirovohrad). If the sub sample of top-25% performing farms was to be considered, the maximum land value will increase to around 6800 UAH or $860 USD (Oleh Nivevskiy & Serhiy Kandul, 2011, The Value of Farmland - Expected Farmland Prices in Ukraine after lifting the Moratorium on Farmland Sales, Institute for Economic Research and Policy Consulting). It is widely expected that farmland values in the Ukraine will continue to rise as the number of investors keen to access the productivity potential of the countrys black earth rises. In recent years there has been a proliferation of investment schemes based on the cultivation of Ukrainian farmland, with notable one scheme collapsing entirely and another offering land parcels for an extortionate price of $2,325 (USD) per hectare. This represents a potential land-banking style mark-up of 1,130% at worst, and 170% at best.
Farmland values across emerging economies in Europe continued to perform well during 2011 as increased investor appetite for productive agricultural assets, as well as active agriculture investment policies from China and Arab states who are interested in bolstering food security has provided stable short-term pricing support. Throughout Europe there is little data available to effectively measure the performance of farmland investments; one must then rely on anecdotal evidence supplied by land agents and agribusinesses in the region. There remains substantial growth potential in the region; in Romania for example, which joined the EU in 2007, farmland can be bought for between 2,000 - 3,500 per hectare up to 40 times cheaper than in parts of Western Europe. (Daily Telegraph, 2011, Rich pickings from Eastern Europe's farmlands). According to Valeriu Tabara; Romanian Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development (MADR), foreigners currently own more than 700,000 hectares of agricultural area in Romania, representing 8.5% of the total arable land. The agricultural land owned by the foreigners in Romania at the moment is more than 700,000 hectares, with Italy having 24.29% of the surface, Germany 15.48% and the Arab countries, 9.9%. The request to buy agricultural land is a developing phenomenon,Tabara said. According to the data revealed by the minister, other countries with significant participations are Austria with 6.13%, Spain with 6.2%, Denmark with 4.25%, the Netherlands with
_________________________________________________________________________________
Elsewhere in the region, a hectare of agricultural land in Hungary, Poland or the Czech Republic is priced between 5,500 and 7,000 demonstrating a continued upward trend in values throughout 2011. Investors considering farmland as an investment should seek independent advice from an experienced professional before participating in any investment project based on the acquisition and cultivation of agricultural assets. DGC Asset Management offers, advice, research, due diligence and opportunities to invest in prime agricultural assets in key global regions. For more information about current opportunities, contact the Management Team at DGC Asset Management.
10 %
Average increase in Ukraine farm lease values in 2011
12-20%
Average increase in Romanian farmland values in 2011
8.65%
Volume of Romanian farmland owned by overseas Investors
_________________________________________________________________________________
4.5
Asia
For example, the Kuwait Investment Authority (KIA) have been targeting farmland investments in Asia, notably in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos via a specially established investment vehicle; the Kuwait China Investment Co (KCIC). The KCIS was established in 2005 with a capital of 80 million dinars ($278.7 million) and has approached governments in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos according to Faisal Nawaz, Chief Financial Officer at the firm. The investing environment in Asia can be obstructive in certain countries however. When KIC sought to acquire rice farming land in Cambodia directly through the central Government it provoked widespread resistance amongst the population. The Qatar Investment Authority (QIA) has joint venture funds investing in farmland in Indonesia, Vietnam, Malaysia and the Philippines (Indiana University, 2009, Land grab or development opportunity? Agricultural investment and international land deals in Africa). The United Arab Emirates (UAE) also plans to invest up to $700 billion in East Asia as it seeks to disperse the huge profits made from its oil industry. Abu Dhabis Al Dahra Agricultural Company is halfway through a plan involving more than 60,700 hectares of farmland in Europe, the US, South Asia and North Africa in order to boost the food security for the state. The entire plan encompasses an investment of Dh1 billion (US$272.2 million). The holdings include 4,050 hectares in Pakistan, which will rise to 10,100 hectares in the next two years.
It is quite impossible to provide a complete review of the investment performance of farmland across the entirety of the Asian continent within the context of this document. Reporting in many countries is unreliable and the majority of transactions are conducted at either subsistence farmer or governmental level where the flow of information is poor, if not non-existent. During the compilation of market data and evidence for the purpose of publication in this document, the Management Team at DGC Asset Management have conducted interviews with institutional investors, government officials and agribusiness operators in Asia in order to establish the state of the investing landscape within the various farmland markets in the region. It became quite clear during this research-led process that the data simply doesnt exist in any reliable format to ascertain precise farmland values or farmland investment returns in the majority of countries investigated. In fact it is often true to say that recent interest from institutional investors is forming the basis of a previously non-existent agricultural property market in many of the countries surveyed. It seems that the capital value of farmland assets that form part of larger institutional investment are assessed using an income capitalisation model, taking into account the cost of establishing a modern agricultural operation on the land, weighed against the projected revenues from harvesting. In 2011, the Asian farmland market has continued to capture the focus of sovereign investors motivated by food security rather than investors seeking financial returns.
_________________________________________________________________________________
4.6
Africa
African farmland is very high on the agenda both of sovereign investors seeking to sure up domestic food supplies, and financial investors seeking superior returns. Whilst risk certainly features heavily in the African land market, especially concerning productive agricultural land, it is true to say that there is substantial profit potential for those prepared to take on board some extra risk. Ample opportunities exist for greenfield developments in Africa, with large tracts of suitable land yet to be cultivated, whilst improved infrastructure and modern agricultural practices improve on-farm profitability and reduce losses due to poor storage and transport facilities. The introduction of modern irrigation systems can dramatically improve the capital value of suitable land assets as well as productivity and yield. In South Africa, irrigated land traded for R$10,000 per hectare in 2011, whilst equivalent dry-land achieved only R$2,000. The same trend can be seen in every African nation that allows direct farmland ownership creating opportunities for Investors capable of delivering infrastructure improvements on the ground. Ample opportunities also exist to improve agricultural practices including soil management and improvements taking advantage of excellent fertile soils and improving profitability. Demand for agricultural products is expected to be especially strong in Africa, as UN population growth figures show the African population expanding by 107% between 2007 and 2050 against a global average growth rate of 30%, and only 2% in high income countries.
Emergent Asset Management, a boutique UKbased fund manager is investing heavily in African farmland and is targeting investment returns of up to 25% per year. Emergent will not discuss its exact size of their fund; according to some sources however, the figure is close to $540 million (Oakland Institute, 2001, Deciphering Emergents Investments in Africa). In 2008 South Korean firm, Daewoo Logistics, signed a 99-year lease on 3.2 million acres, nearly half of the countrys arable land in order to grow 5 million tonnes of corn and 500,000 tonnes of palm oil per year, and had intended to spend approximately $6 billion over 20 years on supporting infrastructure. The deal generated controversy amongst the population as many viewed the deal, which was negotiated behind closed doors, as yet more evidence of poor governance and a violation of the countrys constitution. The deal fuelled anti-government protests that had already been occurring in the country. In March 2009, a military-backed coupdetat forced the resignation of President Marc Ravalomana, and the newly installed leader Andry Rajoelina subsequently cancelled Daewoos contract.
_________________________________________________________________________________
3%
Average increase in Australian farmland values in 2011
12%
Average yield from a Western Australian wheat farm in 2011
11%
Volume of Australian farmland owned by overseas Investors
_________________________________________________________________________________
5. Investment Strategies
Whether choosing to invest in farmland directly, or via a managed investment vehicle such as a Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) or farmland investment fund, there are two underlying investment strategies to consider when approaching productive agricultural land as an alternative investment asset class. Investors seeking capital preservation, income and an inflation hedge may best consider acquiring suitable productive land and leasing to a farming tenant, and those with a little more appetite for risk may further choose to share in the profits - and any potential losses - at harvesting. For those investors seeking to generate superior investment returns, greenfield developments involving the development and cultivation of previously unutilised land may seem more appropriate as substantial capital value can be added through on-site soil preparation and infrastructure investments, whilst long-term revenue is capturing through on-going cultivation of a range of crops. In both cases, Investors must also consider the operational strategy, including the type of crops grown, whether food crops for human consumption, or as feedstock for biofuel production, or even permanent crops such as vines, or oil producing trees for biodiesel production. In most cases the most profitable crops with acceptable risk parameters will ultimately win the competition for production on arable land.
_________________________________________________________________________________
1%
Average annual rental yield from UK farmland
3.9%
Average annual rental yield from Iowa State farmland
5-8%
Rental yield range for Western Australian farmland
In the United States, the 7th Federal Reserve District's First Quarter 2011 report on Farmland values and credit conditions showed that district cash rental rates for agricultural land in 2011 jumped 16% higher compared with 2010. In Iowa State, corn and soybean land generated cash rents of $528 per hectare in 2011, compared with $365 per hectare in 2007, representing a gross yield of 3.9% when considering the average value of cropping or pasture land was $5,426 as of September 2011 (Iowa State Extension Service | Iowa State University, 2011, Sept 2011 Farmland Survey). In Western Australia, one of the worlds key wheat growing regions, good quality arable land rents for up to 6% of the asset value per year, whilst some superior livestock stations can achieve up to 8%.
_________________________________________________________________________________
10.2%
Average annual return since 2007 from DGC farmland
100%
Net capital gains from the development of greenfield sites
_________________________________________________________________________________
6. Risks
Whilst the investment performance of farmland has historically been less volatile than traditional assets like equities, it is important for Investors to recognise that farmland investments, like all investments, carry risks that are specific to the asset class. Statistics cannot wholly express these risks. As such, in addition to quantitative risk analysis one should also assess risk qualitatively. Any investor considering farmland investments as part of a balanced and diversified investment portfolio should make efforts to ensure that they are familiar with the risks involved in farmland investments. Risks involved in owning farmland properties can be separated into two broad categories: Endogenous Risks Those risks having an internal origin relating to specific crops, on-site management and site location. Exogenous Risks Those risks having an external origin such as commodity prices, extreme climatic events and international trade policies. Whilst risks cannot be eliminated, both endogenous and exogenous risks can be managed and mitigated through proper planning and execution. DGC Asset Management Ltd is most able to add value to Clients through the application of a screening process during asset selection. DGC differentiates itself from the conventional by the quality of its risk awareness and risk management processes.
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
Sector
Location
Asset
Investable Opportunities
_________________________________________________________________________________
7. Summary
Productive agricultural land offers certain Investors the opportunity to diversify and optimise a well-balanced investment portfolio, whilst also generating superior long-term investment returns without the added volatility associated with traditional asset classes. Opportunities for smaller Investors are limited as competition for suitable, investable assets is stiff. Larger tracts of productive land ultimately offer the best value and potential to prospective Investors as smaller paddocks attract amenity buyers and sell for highly inflated values when compared to large arable estates which tend to trade for a lower price per hectare and also generate annual income. Besides capital adequacy, other barriers such as the ability to identify and measure suitable properties, and skilled management to maximise opportunities to add capital value and increase yield prevent smaller Investors from participating directly in farmland investments. This has led to a proliferation of farmland investment schemes aimed at smaller investors, usually based on a similar investment model to that of the Managed Investment Schemes prevalent in Australia throughout 2005 to 2008. Having assessed a range of such schemes in the various global regions including Europe, Latin America, Australasia and Africa, it is the opinion of the Authors that very few schemes offer any real value to the Investor and, in many cases, seem to have been structured to generate a capital gain for the Vendor on sale to an Investor, rather than as a mechanism to raise capital for an on-going agricultural production project. In the short term, agricultural land is likely to continue to outperform other asset classes as increased investor interest; high commodity prices and a lack of availability converge to provide solid underlying price support. At the most basic level, farmland values are supported by net farm revenues, so any fall back in commodity prices or a substantial increase in operational costs will squeeze farming profit margins and likely impact land values as assets becomes less profitable. In the long-term, a global shortage of suitable land which cannot be resolved, diminishing yields, population growth and rising personal income in developing economies will continue to push productive land values higher. Appetite for agricultural commodities from the energy sector will also continue to impact the agriculture sector, and innovative new energy crops such as oil-producing trees offer substantially higher margins for farmers and Investors. By far the most profitable opportunities lie within the framework of greenfield development, adding capital value through the development of infrastructure and irrigation at previously uncultivated sites, and collecting superior income streams through modern agricultural practice. DGC Asset Management will continue to assess measure and deliver farmland investment opportunities throughout 2012, and will continue to raise capital for the one approved project currently in the company portfolio. Due diligence is currently being undertaken for a second option which will allow Clients to invest directly in sustainable agricultural production in Africa. For more information regarding farmland investments, or to speak to DGC about the current selection of approved farmland investments, please contact the management team at DGC.
_________________________________________________________________________________
10. References
Hancock Agricultural Investment Group (2009). From the website of Hancock Agricultural Investment Group, an MFC Global Investment Management Company. Available online at: http://www.haig.jhancock.com/ UN Population Division (2007). UN 2006 population revision. UN, New York. Available online at: http://esa.un.org/unpp/ http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/longrange2/WorldPop2300final.pdf United Nations Environment Programme Rapid Response Assessment (February 2009). The Environmental Food Crisis: The environments role in averting future food crises. Available online at http://www.grida.no/_res/site/file/publications/FoodCrisis_lores.pdf Cassman, K. G. Ecological intensification of cereal production systems: yield potential, soil quality, and precision agriculture. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 96, 59525959 (1999). Cohen, J. E. & Federoff, N. V. Colloquium on Plants and Population: Is There Time? (National Academy of Sciences, Washington DC, 1999). Alexandratos, N. World food and agriculture: outlook for the medium and longer term. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 96, 59085914 (1999). MNP (2006) (Edited by A.F. Bouwman, T. Kram and K. Klein Goldewijk), Integrated modelling of global environmental change. An overview of IMAGE 2.4. Wikipedia (2009). London. Available online at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London [Accessed on 6 August 2009] Wikipedia (2009). Singapore. Available online at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore [Accessed on 6 August 2009] Wikipedia (2009). Dubai. Available online at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dubai [Accessed on 6 August 2009] FAOSTAT (2009). FAOSTAT. Available online at: http://faostat.fao.org/default.aspx [Accessed on the 20 January 2009]. Wikipedia (2009). London. Available online at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London [Accessed on 6 August 2009] Wikipedia (2009). Singapore. Available online at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore [Accessed on 6 August 2009] Wikipedia (2009). Dubai. Available online at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dubai [Accessed on 6 August 2009] Stern Review (2006). The Economics of Climate Change, Part II: The Impacts of Climate Change on Growth and Development, pp. 67 73. Stern Review, UK. Lobell et al. (2008). Prioritizing climate change adaptation needs for food security in 2030. Science 319 (5863): 607-610. United Nations Environment Programme Rapid Response Assessment (February 2009). The Environmental Food Crisis: The environments role in averting future food crises. Available online at http://www.grida.no/_res/site/file/publications/FoodCrisis_lores.pdf World Bank (2009). Global Economic Prospects: Commodities at the Crossroads. World Bank, Washington, D.C. Available online at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTGEP2009/Resources/10363_WebPDFw47.pdf Banse et al. (2008). Will EU biofuel policies affect global agricultural markets? European Review of Agricultural Economics 35 (2): 117-141. OECD-FAO (2008). Agricultural Outlook 2008-2017. OECD, Paris. http://www.agri-outlook.org/dataoecd/54/15/40715381.pdf [Accessed on 21 May 2009]. World Bank (2007). World Development Report 2007: Development and the Next Generation. World Bank, Washington, D.C.
_________________________________________________________________________________
World Bank (2008). Rising Food and Fuel Prices: Addressing the Risks to Future Generations. World Bank, Washington, D.C. Available online at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DEVCOMMEXT/Resources/Food-Fuel.pdf?resourceurlname=FoodFuel.pdf FAO (2008): The state of food and agriculture 2008. FAO, Rome. Available online at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/011/i0100e/i0100e00.htm Telegraph Online (12 July 2008). The Great Biofuels Con. Available online at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/3347046/TheGreat-Biofuels-Con.html Fitzherbert et al. (2008). How will oil palm expansion affect biodiversity? Trends in Ecology and Evolution 23 (10): 528-545. Ethridge et al. (2006). World cotton outlook: Projections to 2015/16. Beltwide Cotton Conferences, San Antonio, Texas January 3-6, 2006. Available online at: http://www.aaec.ttu.edu/Publications/Beltwide%202006/206-234.pdf OECD (2008) OECD Environmental Outlook to 2030. Available online at: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/29/33/40200582.pdf United Nations Environment Programme Rapid Response Assessment (February 2009). The Environmental Food Crisis: The environments role in averting future food crises. Available online at http://www.grida.no/_res/site/file/publications/FoodCrisis_lores.pdf OECD (2008). Rising Food Prices, Causes and Consequences. OECD, Paris. Available online at: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/54/42/40847088.pdf Maizel et al. (1998). Historical interrelationships between population settlement and farmland in the conterminous United States, 1790 to 1990. In: T.D. Sisk (ed.) Perspectives on the land use history of North America: a context for understanding our changing environment, U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division, Biological Science Report, USGS/BRD/BSR 19980003. Klein, Goldewijk K. (2001). Estimating global land use change over the past 300 years: the HYDE database. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 15 (2): 417- 433. Klein, Goldewijk K. (2005). Three centuries of global population growth: A spatial referenced population density database for 1700 2000. Population and Environment, 26 (4): 343-367. Klein, Goldewijk K. and Beusen, A. (2009). Long-term dynamic modelling of global population and built-up area in a spatially explicit way. In preparation. Potere, D. and Schneider, A. (2007). A critical look at representations of urban areas in global maps. Geojournal 69 (1-2): 55-80. Klein, Goldewijk K. and Beusen, A. (2009). Long-term dynamic modelling of global population and built-up area in a spatially explicit way. In preparation. UN (2008). United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. Stehfest et al. (2008). Climate benefits of changing diet, Climatic Change, in press. Wikipedia (2009). United Kingdom. Available online at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_kingdom Wikipedia (2009). France. Available online at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France Pinstrup-Andersen, P. and Pandya-Lorch, R. (1998). Food security and sustainable use of natural resources: A 2020 Vision. Ecological Economics 26 (1): 1-10. Bai et al. (2007): Land cover change and soil fertility decline in tropical regions. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 32 (3): 195-213. Investment and Pensions Europe (November 2007). The answer lies in the soil. Spotlight on: Alternatives. The Economist (2009). Green Shoots, The Economist News Article, 19/03/2009. Hardin, W. and Cheng, P. (2002). Farmland Investment Under Conditions of Certainty and Uncertainty. Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 25 (1): 81-98.
_________________________________________________________________________________
IPD Rural property Index: http://www.ipd.com/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=fASQo6ubtmQ%3d&tabid=1010 Canadian Farmland Values: http://bigpictureagriculture.blogspot.com/2011/11/2011-canadian-farmland-prices-up-95.html (http://www.ier.com.ua/files/publications/Policy_papers/Agriculture_dialogue/2011/PP_32_Farmland_prices_after_moratorium_E NG.pdf (Oleh Nivevskiy & Serhiy Kandul, 2011, The Value of Farmland - Expected Farmland Prices in Ukraine after lifting the Moratorium on Farmland Sales, Institute for Economic Research and Policy Consulting). Iowa State University Farmland Value Survey: http://www.extension.iastate.edu/agdm/wholefarm/html/c2-75.html Iowa State University, 2010 Farmland Value Survey Iowa State Universityhttp://www.extension.iastate.edu/agdm/wholefarm/html/c2-70.html Big Picture Agriculture Blog, 2011, Farm Cash Rental rates in Middle America http://bigpictureagriculture.blogspot.com/2011/05/farm-cash-rental-rates-in-middle.html Agrifirma Brazi:l http://www.agrifirma-brazil.com/businessplan.html Adecagro: http://www.adecoagro.com/index.php?seccion_generica_id=42 Savills International Farmland Update: http://pdf.euro.savills.co.uk/market-in-minute-reports/savills-market-in-minutesfarmland-q3-2011.pdf United States Department of Agriculture, Land Use, Value, and Management: Agricultural Land Values: http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/landuse/aglandvaluechapter.htm DEFRA, Observatory Programme Indicators: http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/foodfarm/enviro/observatory/programmeindicators/ The Economist, Petrodollars v smallholders: http://www.economist.com/node/13527987 The Oakland institute, Understanding Land Investment Deals in Africa: http://www.oaklandinstitute.org/sites/oaklandinstitute.org/files/OI_EAM_Brief_1.pdf Indiana University, Land grab or development opportunity? Agricultural investment and international land deals in Africa: http://dlc.dlib.indiana.edu/dlc/bitstream/handle/10535/6178/land%20grab%20or%20dev%20opportunity.pdf?sequence=1 Sheila Oviedo, 2011, Sustainalytics, Avoiding the Land Grab Responsible Farmland Investing in Developing Nations: http://www.sustainalytics.com/sites/default/files/avoiding-the-land-grab-responsible-farmland-investing-indevelopingnations_final.pdf The Economist, 2011, When others are grabbing their land: http://www.economist.com/node/18648855
_________________________________________________________________________________