134 



STATEMENT OF PHILIP M. SENG, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF 

 EXECUTIVE OFFICER, U.S. MEAT EXPORT FEDERATION 



Mr. Seng. Good morning. The U.S. Meat Export Federation 

 would first like to express its appreciation to the subcommittees for 

 the opportunity to express our views on the future partnership of 

 U.S. agriculture and the Foreign Agricultural Service in expanding 

 future U.S. agricultural exports. 



The U.S. red meat industry and the FAS have enjoyed a produc- 

 tive and fruitful partnership in expanding foreign markets for red 

 meat over the past decades. The performance of red meat exports 

 in recent years bears this out. Total red meat exports worth $740 

 million in 1986 have exhibited explosive growth and will exceed $3 

 billion this year alone. USMEF's long-range plan predicts that red 

 meat exports can reach $8 billion — 1993 dollars — by 2001 if the 

 U.S. can maintain its momentum. Simply stated, red meats have 

 been one of the fastest growing agricultural export categories over 

 the past decade. Prospects for future growth are bright as trade 

 barriers decline, world population increases, and economic prosper- 

 ity — ^based on free market policies — expands to most of the world's 

 nations. 



I would like to offer a vision of what the global marketplace may 

 resemble as the millennium turns. First of all, we think trade is- 

 sues would be subsumed by competitive issues. NAFTA, GATT, and 

 a host of bilateral agreements have and will have a cumulative im- 

 pact of lowering trade barriers and increasing access to foreign 

 markets. Japan is perhaps the best example where the priority of 

 export-led economic growth policies have slowly overridden the pro- 

 tectionist sentiment of an inefficient agricultural sector and result 

 in the lowering of trade barriers. 



In just the red meat arena alone, similar marketing opening ef- 

 forts have been undertaken in partnership between the United 

 States meat industry and the United States Government in Korea, 

 the European Community and several other markets. GATT and 

 NAFTA promise to continue the process of lowering trade barriers. 



Unfortunately, the U.S. has a reputation for its strength when it 

 comes to opening markets but weakness in marketing follow-up. 

 The benefit of trade agreements should be measured by the black 

 and white of the bottom line: Sales. 



Sadly, our competitors have the edge on us when it comes to ag- 

 gressive marketing programs. All our major competitors outspend 

 the United States in terms of the ratio of market development 

 spending to the value of their exports. Take the European Commu- 

 nity, for example. Even after GATT is fully implemented by the 

 year 2000, Europe can still directly subsidize meat exports to the 

 tune of almost $1.5 billion per year. In the United States, the red 

 meat industry can expect less than $8 million in Government re- 

 sources in 1994 for export market development. 



Despite what some may view as an aggressive international mar- 

 keting program, the U.S. red meat industry and the U.S. Govern- 

 ment still collectively spend less than 1 percent of its total inter- 

 national sales on foreign market promotion. This percentage is de- 

 clining as the export commitment by the Grovernment continues to 

 recede. 



