SUGAR AND SWEETENERS YEARBOOK                                May 27, 1999
Month 1999, ERS-SSS-225
               Approved by the World Agricultural Outlook Board
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUGAR AND SWEETENERS YEARBOOK is published annually by the Economic Research
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20036-5831.  This
release contains only the text of the SUGAR AND SWEETENERS report -- tables and
graphics are not included.

Subscriptions to the printed version of the report are available from the 
ERS-NASS order desk.  Call, toll-free, 1-800-999-6779 and ask for stock 
# SUB-SSS-4033, $25/2 issues.  ERS-NASS accepts MasterCard and Visa.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contents
Page

Summary
U.S. Sugar
Current Year, 1998/99
Forecasts for 1999/2000
Mexican Sugar
High Fructose Corn Syrup
 HFCS and Mexico
 Level of U.S.-Mexico HFCS-55 and HFCS-90 Trade
Special Articles
Early-Season USDA Projections of Sugar Production
List of Tables
Autofax Access to Sugar-Related Data
Internet Access to Sugar-Related Data.

Report Coordinator
Stephen Haley
(202) 694-5247    FAX (202) 694-5884
E-mail: SHALEY@ECON.AG.GOV

Principal Contributors
Stephen Haley
Nydia Suarez

Database Coordinator/Graphics & Table Design
Fannye Lockley-Jolly

Layout & Text Design
Wynnice Napper

Approved by the World Agricultural Outlook Board. Summary
released May 18, 1999. The next Sugar and Sweetener Situation and
Outlook is scheduled for release on September 21, 1999. Text and
summaries may  be accessed electronically. For details on
electronic access, call ERS Customer Service (202) 694-5050.

Summary

U.S. beet sugar production for 1998/99 is projected at 4.225
million short tons, raw value (STRV), down from 1997/98. The
National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) has estimated a
record sugarbeet crop of 32.66 million tons, but the crop has a
poor sugar content. 

U.S. cane sugar production for 1998/99 is projected at 3.848
million STRV. Florida is projected at 2.127 million STRV, 10
percent above the preceding record year. Louisiana is projected
at 1.260 million STRV, slightly less than last year's record.
Texas is projected at 104,402 STRV, a considerable improvement
over the previous year. Hawaii is projected at 350,000 STRV, and
the Puerto Rico cane sugar is projected at 7,000 STRV.

Imports under the 1998/99 tariff-rate quota (TRQ) are projected
at 1.412 million STRV in the May 1999 World Agricultural Supply
and Demand Estimates (WASDE) report. Other imports are currently
projected at 615,000 STRV, an increase of 120,000 STRV over the
April 1999 projection due to an expected increase in imports of
high-tier tariff sugar. Other import projections are for the
Refined Sugar Re-export Program (175,000 STRV), the Sugar
Containing Products Re-export Program (200,000 STRV), imports for
the production of polyhydric alcohol (15,000 STRV), and the
estimated sugar content of sugar syrups entering the United State
s under the tariff heading 1702.90.40 (100,000 STRV).

Deliveries in 1998/99 are currently forecast at 9.975 million
STRV. Sugar exports under the Refined Sugar Re-export Program are
currently projected at 175,000 STRV. Ending stocks are projected
at 1.629 million STRV, resulting in an ending stocks-to-use ratio
of 16.0 percent, above the trigger level for the cancellation of
the May TRQ tranche. 

Beet sugar production for 1999/2000 is projected at 4.530 million
STRV, up 7 percent from 1998/99. NASS' estimates of acreage
intentions for sugarbeets exceeded last year's acreage planted by
50,000 acres. Analysis supports a U.S. yield projection of 21.0
tons per acre, implying a sugarbeet crop of about 31.8 million
tons. With normal weather and technical improvements consistent
with historical trends, sugar yield is projected at 3.00 tons an
acre.

U.S. cane sugar production for 1999/2000 is projected at 3.870
million STRV. Florida's cane sugar production is projected at
2.025 million STRV. U.S. cane acreage harvested for sugar is
expected to be slightly above this year's level, and sugar per
acre is expected to be lower but consistent with trend at 4.71
tons per acre. Louisiana cane sugar production is projected at
1.400 million STRV. Acreage harvested is projected to increase by
20,000 acres, and yields are expected to continue increasing.
Texas' cane sugar production is projected at 100,000 STRV,
Hawaii's is projected at 330,000 STRV, and Puerto Rico's is
projected at 15,000 STRV.

Nonquota imports for 1999/2000 are projected at 725,000 STRV. The
largest component is high-tier tariff imports at 260,000 STRV.
The remainder of other import projections are for the Refined
Sugar Re-export Program (175,000 STRV), the Sugar Containing
Products Re-export Program (175,000 STRV), imports for the
production of polyhydric alcohol (15,000 STRV), and the estimated
sugar content of sugar syrups entering the United State s under
the tariff heading 1702.90.40 (100,000 STRV). The raw and refined
TRQ for 1999/2000 will be announced later this year but must sum
to at least 1.256 million STRV, the World Trade Organization's
minimum.

Deliveries for 1999/2000 are projected at 10.150 million STRV,
and exports for the Refined Sugar Re-export Program are projected
at 175,000 STRV. Projected total use for 1999/2000 sums to 10.325
million STRV, up 175,000 STRV over 1998/99. 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) currently projects
Mexican sugar production for the November 1999/ October 2000
marketing year (MY 1999) at 5.14 million metric tons, raw value
(MTRV). Acreage is expected to be about the same as this year,
although yields should be higher, about 72 metric tons per
hectare. Sugar consumption is expected to be flat in MY 1999,
about 4.2 million MTRV. Projected exports are 900,000 MTRV, about
6 percent lower than predicted exports in MY 1998. The Mexican
Government has agreed to continue its financing assistance into
MY 1999 to keep stocks at least 600,000 MTRV. Sugar stocks for FY
1999 are projected to be 629,000 MTRV.

U.S. high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) production in 1999 is
projected to increase by 4.6 percent to 9.572 million tons: 3.431
million tons for HFCS-42 and 6.141 million tons for HFCS-55.
HFCS-42 production growth is projected at 4.1 percent, up from
3.4 percent in 1998. HFCS-55 production growth is projected at
4.9 percent, down from 6.6 percent in 1998. 

U.S. Sugar

On May 12, 1999, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
released its revised estimate for 1998/99 and its initial
projection for 1999/2000. 

Current Year, 1998/99

Production

Beet sugar production is projected at 4.225 million short tons,
raw value (STRV). The National Agricultural Statistics Service
(NASS) has estimated the sugarbeet crop at 32.66 million tons, 
9.3 percent above the 1997/98 final production estimate.1/
----------
1/ Unless otherwise noted, sugarcane and sugarbeets are reported
in short tons.
----------
Acreage harvested has been forecast at a record 1.452 million
acres, 1.6 percent above the previous year. National yield has
been forecast at a record 22.5 tons per acre. 

Although the size of the sugarbeet crop is a record, it has
yielded low sugar content. Based on the estimated sugarbeet yield
of 22.5 tons per acre, expected sugar per acre based on the
statistical trend would have been 3.12 STRV. However, the actual
sugar per acre is projected at 2.91 STRV, nearly 7 percent below
expectations. Higher-than-average temperatures have introduced
concerns, especially in the Red River Valley region, regarding
additional sugar losses stored in piles. USDA analysis concludes
that, while there has been some pile deterioration due to the
unseasonably high temperatures, most beets have survived the
winter intact, allaying concerns of further reductions in beet
sugar projections. The slicing campaign in the Red River Valley
is still expected to run through June. The California campaign
has started, and sugar production from the desugaring of molasses
and from thick juice stored during the slicing campaign in other
regions will contribute to production for the remainder of the
year.

Cane sugar production is projected at 3.848 million STRV.
Campaigns in Florida, Texas, and Louisiana have ended, implying
mainland production of 3.491 million STRV. Production will
continue for the remainder of the year in Hawaii and will start
soon in Puerto Rico.

Florida cane sugar is projected at 2.127 million STRV. Current
year production is projected over 10 percent above the preceding
year, which was a record. NASS has estimated the sugarcane for
sugar crop at 16.860 million tons on 429,000 acres. Sugar is
projected at a record 4.96 tons, 8.5 percent above the preceding
year. Growers benefitted from dry and very warm conditions
throughout the growing season. Irrigation and effective
management practices helped mitigate against drought conditions
that affected other Florida crops. Because of the large sugarcane
crop, the season ran 3 weeks longer than normal into the latter
part of April. 

Louisiana cane sugar is projected at 1.260 million STRV. This
year's total is slightly less than last year's record but is the
second highest for the State . NASS has estimated the sugarcane
for sugar crop at 11.6 million tons on 400,000 acres. Sugar per
acre is projected at 3.15 tons, down 5 percent from the previous
year's record 3.32 tons per acre. The region experienced very dry
and hot conditions through most of the growing season and
received drenching rain in the fall as several tropical storms
passed through. Wet conditions pushed back the harvest, which was
not completed until several weeks into January. Although
individual growers may have experienced some losses, sources
indicate that the cold tolerance of current sugarcane varieties
helped the crop survive January conditions. Moreover, the
sugarcane variety LCP85-384 has sparked a yield-enhancing
revolution, which has produced the heavier sugar content.
Investments in new chopper harvesters have been made at the same
time, helping to mitigate lodging problems that can result with
heavier cane.

Texas cane sugar is projected at 104,402 STRV, a considerable
improvement over the previous year's 79,569 STRV. The Texas
producing area suffered through drought conditions for most of
the season, but plentiful rain occurring in the fall contributed
to increased sugarcane development. Although there had been some
question regarding sugar content, results indicate that sugar
tonnage per acre netted 3.26, up nearly 10 percent over the
previous year. The milling season extended until the middle of
April.

Hawaii cane sugar is projected at 350,000 STRV. NASS does not
forecast 1999 sugarcane acreage until June. However, local
analysts conservatively forecast this year's sugar production to
equal the previous year's 350,000 STRV. Through March, the fiscal
year production has totaled 95,700 STRV, about 96 percent of the
previous year through the same period. One source of concern has
been the Pioneer mill on Maui. High costs have forced the owner
(AMFAC/JMB Hawaii) to discontinue sugar production at the end of
the season in September. 

Puerto Rico cane sugar is projected at 7,000 STRV. This low
projection takes into account hurricane damage that put the Roig
mill out of operation for this year. The only other mill, Central
Agraso (formerly Coloso), will account for total Puerto Rican
production this year. 

Imports

Imports under the tariff-rate quota (TRQ) are projected at 1.412
million STRV in the May 1999 World Agricultural Supply and Demand
Estimates (WASDE) report. This amount reflects the cancellation
of January and March tranches (165,345 STRV each) that resulted
when the ending stocks-to-use projections published in the WASDE
for those months were above 15.5 percent. The cancellation of the
May tranche, due to a projected ending stocks-to-use ratio of
16.0, is not reflected. The cancellation of the May tranche
implies a downward revision of imports under the TRQ by 165,345
STRV.  

Other imports are currently projected at 615,000 STRV, up 120,000
STRV over the April 1999 projection. The projection of high-tier
tariff sugar entering from Mexico caused the increase. Through
April 1999, about 184 STRV high-tier tariff Mexican sugar had
entered the United States. In May 1999, raw sugar amounting to
about 15,432 STRV entered. Data available to USDA indicate that
additional tonnage sufficient to bring the total to 120,000 STRV
for the year now awaits entry. The incentive for traders to
deliver high-tier tariff Mexican sugar into the United States is
explained by several factors: low world prices below 6 cents a
pound (No. 11 CSCE Contract, New York), a high-tier tariff rate
for raw and refined sugar under the North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA) of 13.6 cents a pound and 14.42 cents a pound,
and the absence of price-based safeguards that apply to
over-quota sugar from all sources except Mexico and Canada.

The remainder of other import projections are for the Refined
Sugar Re-export Program (175,000 STRV), the Sugar Containing
Products Re-export Program (200,000 STRV), imports for the
production of polyhydric alcohol (15,000 STRV), and the estimated
sugar content of sugar syrups entering the United States under
the tariff heading 1702.90.4000 (100,000 STRV).

Deliveries, Exports, and Stocks

Total deliveries, including deliveries for human consumption,
sugar included in products for the Sugar Containing Products
Re-export Program, deliveries for use in the Polyhydric Alcohol
Program,  and for feed use are currently forecast at 9.975
million STRV. Exports of  sugar under the Refined Sugar Re-Export
Program are currently projected at 175,000 STRV. Ending-period
1998/99 stocks are calculated as a residual of total supply
(projected 11.779 million STRV) less total use (projected 10.150
million STRV). Ending stocks are, therefore, projected at 1.629
million STRV. The projected stocks-to-use ratio is 16.0 percent, 
above the trigger level for the cancellation of the May TRQ
tranche. 

Prices

U.S. raw sugar prices (nearby futures, C.I.F., duty-paid,
Contract No. 14, New York) averaged 22.57 cents per pound during
April, up just 2 points from the March average. The range for the
month was 66 points, from a high of 22.98 on April 1 to a low of
22.32 on April 23, before closing on the 30th at 22.65 cents per
pound. July No. 14 futures prices averaged 22.48 cents in the
first 8 market days of May, with a maximum and a minimum price of
22.70 cents and of 22.27 cents per pound. Increasing U.S. sugar
deliveries and the outlook for lower 1999/2000 U.S. sugar
carryover stocks may have boosted nearby futures prices recently.
Wholesale refined beet sugar prices (F.O.B. plant, Midwest
markets) have come down 0.20 cents to 27.00 cents a pound in
April, likely reflecting the pressure of a larger 1999 crop.

World raw sugar prices, which have been in steady decline over
the past year, bottomed out during the last week of April when
the July contract traded as low as 3.93 cents per pound on April
28, a 14-year low. The bargain basement prices have attracted
buying from Bangladesh and Iran, and interest from potential
Russian buyers. Prices firmed somewhat at the end of the month
when the July contract closed at 4.33 cents. Part of the reason
for the firmer prices were the shipping delays at two major
Brazilian ports. However, the outlook remains negative as bumper
crops in major exporting countries continue to be met with weak
demand. World raw sugar prices averaged 5.44 cents a pound in
April, compared with 10.22 cents in the same month a year
earlier.

Forecasts for 1999/2000

Production

Beet sugar production is projected at 4.530 million STRV, an
increase of over 7 percent from 1998/99. NASS estimates of
acreage intentions for sugarbeets by State sum to 1.548 million
acres, exceeding last year's acreage planted by 50,000. Although
NASS does not forecast acreage harvested until June,
historically-based ratios between acreage harvested and acreage
intentions by State support an early-season projection of 1.510
million acres for the United States. Analysis of State-level
yields supports a U.S. yield projection of 21.0 tons per acre,
implying a sugarbeet crop of about 31.8 million tons. With normal
weather and technical improvements consistent with historical
trend, sugar yield is projected at 3.00 tons an acre, implying
total production of 4.530 million STRV. The sugar recovery rate
is projected at 14.23 percent, nearly 10 percent above the
projected rate for 1998/99, but below the rates for 1996/97
(15.04 percent) and 1997/98 (14.69 percent).

Cane sugar production is projected at 3.870 million STRV,
slightly above the projected total for 1998/99. This total
reflects expectations regarding production from Florida,
Louisiana, Texas, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico.

Florida cane sugar production is projected at 2.025 million STRV,
down from this year's projected record, but it would still be the
second highest in the State's production history. Cane acreage
harvested for sugar is expected to be slightly above this year's
level at 430,000 acres. Sugar per acre is expected to be down but
consistent with trend at 4.71 tons.

The mix of sugarcane varieties used in Florida is very well
suited to local conditions. Irrigation in muck soils helps
considerably in safeguarding the crop from drought conditions
that cause havoc to other crops. Good management practices by
growers and processors contribute as well. A structural upward
shift in cane yields was evidenced in 1997/98. High cane yields
continued in 1998/99 and are projected at 38.2 tons an acre in
1999/2000. The cane crop is projected at 16.4 million tons,
slightly lower than last year's crop. Sucrose recovery is
projected at 12.33 percent, or about 247 pounds per ton of cane.

Louisiana cane sugar production is projected at 1.400 million
STRV, up 11 percent from 1998/99. Acreage harvested is projected
to increase by 20,000 acres over 1998/99 to 420,000 acres. The
expected expansion is centered in the northern cane region where
alternative crop prices have made the growing of sugarcane a much
higher-valued alternative in spite of long trucking distances
from mills. The continued expansion of the LCP85-384 sugarcane
variety implies less of a percentage of sugarcane land in fallow:
about 20 percent instead of the usual 25 percent. This results
because the LCP85-384 permits a third stubble crop, thereby
keeping more land in production. 

Increased acreage planted to the LCP85-384 has increased
Louisiana cane yields above earlier trends. With LCP85-384's
share of sugarcane acreage increasing to about 60 percent, cane
and sugar yields are expected to increase as well. The projected
cane yield is 29.5 tons per acre, up 0.5 ton over 1998/99. The
projected sugar yield is 3.33 tons per acre, up 0.18 ton an acre
from the year before.

Texas cane sugar production is projected at 100,000 STRV.
Projected acreage harvested of cane for sugar is 32.0, the same
as 1998/99. Projected cane yield of 31.25 tons per acre is lower
than 1998/99, however, because there is less acreage devoted to
the cane crop. Sugarcane is projected at 1.0 million tons. Under
normal conditions, an expected recovery rate of 10 percent would
imply the 100,000 STRV production level. One concern, however, is
that the current dry conditions resemble the extremely dry spring
of a year ago. 

Hawaii cane sugar production is projected at 330,000 STRV. The
key factor for Hawaii is the closing of the Pioneer Mill in Maui.
This mill has produced about 20,000 to 25,000 in the mid- to
late-1990s. A reduction of 20,000 STRV from the 1998/99
forecasted 350,000 STRV is the basis of the 1999/2000 Hawaii
projection. A forecasting difficulty with respect to Hawaii is
that the 1999 NASS forecasts of Hawaii acreage and production
relate to 1998/99 rather than 1999/2000. The first NASS acreage
forecast for 1999/2000 will not come until June 2000.

Puerto Rico cane sugar production is projected at 15,000 STRV.
The reconstructed Roig mill should be back in operation, which
should put production back to levels in 1997/98. Nonetheless, the
Puerto Rican sugar sector still faces high costs and problems
stemming in part from the privatization of the mills.

Imports

Non-TRQ imports for 1999/2000 are projected at 725,000 STRV. The
largest component of non-TRQ imports are imports entering at the
high tariff. Most of these imports are expected to be sourced
from Mexico. The NAFTA high-tier tariff for raw sugar (96 pol) is
reduced from 13.60 cents a pound to 12.09 cents a pound in
calendar 2000. The corresponding tariff for refined sugar (100
pol) is reduced from 14.42 cents a pound to 12.81 cents a pound.
There are no price-based safeguards for sugar sourced from NAFTA
countries, and world prices are expected to remain at low levels
for the foreseeable future. It is probable that incentives for
traders to import high-tariff Mexican sugar will be limited by
the effect it has on the No.14 Contract raw sugar futures price.
It is probable that the most important effect of increased
Mexican imports will be to reduce the TRQ.

The remainder of other import projections are for the Refined
Sugar Re-export Program (175,000 STRV), the Sugar Containing
Products Re-export Program (175,000 STRV), imports for the
production of polyhydric alcohol (15,000 STRV), and the estimated
sugar content of sugar syrups entering the United States under
the tariff heading 1702.90.40 (100,000 STRV). The raw and refined
TRQ for 1999/2000 will be announced later this year but must sum
to at least 1.256 million tons. 

Deliveries and Exports

Total deliveries are projected at 10.150 million STRV, an 1.8-
percent increase over the previous year. Total deliveries include
sugar included in products for the Sugar Containing Products
Re-export Program (175,000 STRV), deliveries for use in the
Polyhydric Alcohol Program (15,000 STRV), and for feed use (7,000
STRV). Deliveries for human consumption are calculated as a
residual: 9.953 million STRV. Additionally, exports for the
Refined Sugar Re-export Program are projected at 175,000 STRV.
Projected total use for 1999/2000 sums to 10.325 million STRV, a
growth of 175,000 STRV over 1998/99.

Deliveries to industrial users are projected to increase by 2.5
percent, while deliveries to non-industrial users are projected
to increase by only 0.8 percent. The share of industrial users'
deliveries is projected to grow to 59.6 percent in 1999/2000, up
from 59.2 percent forecast for 1998/99. Deliveries to
confectioners, although down the first half of 1998/99 by over 4
percent compared with a year ago, are expected to recover.
Deliveries for baking and cereal uses and for multiple uses are
expected to continue their strong trend growth patterns. 

Mexican Sugar

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)  currently  projects
Mexican sugar production for the November 1998/October 1999
marketing year (MY 1998) at 5.04 million metric tons, raw value
(MTRV). The Mexican Government's sugar agency, Coaazucar, pegs
production in its fourth sugar estimate somewhat lower, at 4.705
MTRV. Regardless of source, it is agreed that production is down
from the previous year due to decreased yields resulting from
extremely dry weather throughout most of the growing season.
Also, the harvest season in Veracruz was delayed by excessively
wet weather just prior to the normal harvest starting date. Labor
shortages contributed to harvest problems in the states of
Veracruz, Tamaulipas, and San Luis Potosi. Sugar consumption is
projected at 4.24 million MTRV, with the soft drink industry
demanding between 1.2 to 1.4 million MTRV. Sugar exports are
projected at 955,000 MTRV. The Mexican Government helps to
finance storage costs up to 600,000 MTRV. Ending stocks are
projected at 759,000 MTRV. 

USDA currently projects Mexican sugar production for MY 1999 at
5.14 million MTRV. Acreage is expected to be about the same as
this year, although yields should be higher, about 72 metric tons
per hectare, assuming normal weather patterns. Producers are
reportedly holding high inventories, and with low export prices,
producers are not planning for major expansions next year. Sugar
consumption is expected to be flat in MY 1999, about 4.2 million
MTRV. Producers claim that stagnant demand growth is attributable
to the replacement of sugar by imported and domestically-produced
high fructose corn syrup. Although soft drink demand is expected
to grow by 3 percent next year, most of the growth is in bottled
water and diet products. Projected exports are 900,000 MTRV,
about 6 percent lower than predicted exports in MY 1998. The
Mexican Government has agreed to continue into MY 1999 its
financing assistance in keeping stocks at least 600,000 MTRV.
Sugar stocks for FY 1999 are projected to be 629,000 MTRV.

In January 1999, negotiations between sugarcane producers, the
Mexican Government, and the sugar industry produced an agreement
that pays growers 57 percent of the wholesale reference price for
a metric ton (mt) of standard sugar. The price was increased to
3,688.42 pesos per mt, FOB mill, or US$368.84 per mt. Growers
receive 2,102 pesos per mt, up 5 percent from MY 1997. The
reference price for MY 1999 will be 3,921.96 pesos per mt. 

High Fructose Corn Syrup

The combined production of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) for
1998 is estimated at 9.15 million short tons, dry weight, 5.5
percent above 1997. 1/
---------
1/  Throughout this report, high fructose corn syrup is reported
in short tons, dry basis, unless otherwise noted.
---------
  HFCS-42 production is estimated to comprise about 36 percent of
the total, or 3.296 million tons. The remainder (5.854 million
tons) is comprised of HFCS-55 syrup. 2/
--------
2/ In this report, the HFCS-55 comprises corn sweetener products
whose fructose composition is 55 percent or higher. These
products include HFCS-55 syrup, HFCS-55 solid, HFCS-90,
crystalline fructose, and others. 
-------- 
Domestic deliveries of HFCS-42 grew by only 3.4 percent to 3.318
million tons. HFCS-55 deliveries grew by 5.1 percent to 5.561
million tons. HFCS-42 exports were small (39,000 tons), and were
less than imports (61,000 tons). HFCS-55 exports grew by 36
percent to 349,000 tons and now comprise 5.9 percent of total
estimated use, up from 3.7 and 4.6 percent in 1996 and 1997.

HFCS production in 1999 is projected to increase by 4.6 percent
to 9.572 million tons: 3.431 million tons for HFCS-42 and 6.141
million tons for HFCS-55. HFCS-42 production growth is projected
at 4.1 percent, up from 3.4 percent in 1998. HFCS-55 production
growth is projected at 4.9 percent, down from 6.6 percent in
1998. Actual first-quarter (January-March) data show strong
HFCS-42 deliveries of 10.4 percent growth over the same period last
year. Comparable first-quarter HFCS-55 deliveries, on the other
hand, were only 1.7 percent, which compares with 3.8 percent
growth for the first quarter of 1998--less than half as much. For
the entire year, HFCS-42 domestic deliveries are projected at
3.436 million tons, representing 3.6 percent yearly growth. 
HFCS-55 domestic deliveries are projected at 5.756 million tons,
representing 3.5 percent yearly growth, down from 5.1 percent for
1998. 

Exports are difficult to project but should continue to expand.
Figure 1 shows HFCS-55 exports since 1996 to both Mexico and the
world. Total exports have grown from 190,000 tons in 1996, to
257,000 tons in 1997, and 349,000 tons in 1998. In 1996, exports
to Mexico comprised 71 percent of the total. Although exports to
Mexico have continued to expand (153,000 tons in 1997 and 178,000
tons in 1998 according to U.S. Customs data), their proportion of
total exports has declined: 60 percent in 1997 and 51 percent in
1998. With increased compensatory duties on U.S. Mexican exports
(see below), export growth to Mexico will likely decrease
(although January and February U.S. export data show the
opposite). However, if trends to other importers continue, U.S.
HFCS-55 exports should continue to grow despite a slowdown to
Mexico. The current 1999 export projection is 429,000 tons, up 23
percent over 1998.

Milling and Baking News reports some moderate strengthening of
HFCS-42 spot prices. They were at a low of 9.9 cents a pound in
the third quarter of 1998 but have risen to 11.33 cents a pound
in the first quarter of 1999. Even so, the 1999 first-quarter
average is below the comparable period for 1998, when the spot
price averaged 11.53 cents a pound. 

Figure 2 shows the ratio of the HFCS-42 spot price to the Midwest
wholesale beet sugar price, also reported in the Milling and
Baking News. Although beet sugar prices have recently risen over
1998 levels, the HFCS-42 spot price has increased proportionally
more, thereby causing the ratio of the two prices to rise to 0.42
from a low of 0.38 in the third quarter of 1998. A 0.42-ratio
level is still low by historical standards: the ratio averaged
0.61 in 1995 and 0.50 in 1996 before dropping precipitously in
1997. Although the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) does not
project HFCS prices, it would not seem likely that HFCS prices
will return this year to the high levels achieved 3 and 4 years
ago. The U.S. HFCS sector is still burdened by excess capacity,
and it will take some time for demand to catch up with existing
supply potential.

Figure 3 shows net corn cost relative to the spot HFCS-42 price.
The ratio fell below 0.30 in the third quarter and averaged 0.25
in the first quarter of 1999. From a cost perspective, HFCS
producers would seem much better off relative to 1996, 1997, and
even 1998. Although difficult to predict, net corn costs are not
likely to vary much in 1999. USDA reports that 1999 intended corn
acreage is down 2 percent, but weak feed demand will likely limit
any upward price movements implied by reduced production.
Byproduct prices (mainly corn gluten meal and feed) that offset
the cost component of corn prices are at historically low levels
and are likely to remain there.

HFCS and Mexico

There are two HFCS producing facilities in Mexico. ALMEX is
located in the state  of Guadalajara and is jointly owned and
operated by A.E. Staley Manufacturing Company and Archer Daniels
Midland. ARANCIA is located in the state of Queretaro, and Corn
Products International, Inc. now has a controlling interest. Corn
used in wet milling is imported into Mexico from the United
States under a tariff-rate quota (TRQ) administered by the
Mexican Secretariat of Commerce and Industrial Development
(SECOFI). The TRQ for 1998 was 1,622,032 metric tons (mt), and
432,410 mt for the first quarter of 1999. Although there is no
available public data, sources indicate that domestic HFCS
production was between 220,000 and 300,000 mt in 1998. Output is
not expected to expand significantly in 1999. Sources also
indicate that domestic HFCS production displaced between 170,000
and 230,000 mt of sugar consumption in Mexico in 1998.
Presumably, this same level of displacement would be expected in
1999 as well.

HFCS imports from the United States face compensatory duties. The
duties were applied by SECOFI in June 1997 when SECOFI alleged
that HFCS was being dumped into the Mexican market. These duties
were made permanent in January 1998 when the dumping allegations
were substantiated. Duties were also imposed on
HFCS-90 in September 1998 after SECOFI concluded that HFCS-90 was
being imported in order to avoid previously-imposed duties on
HFCS-55. (Because HFCS-90 is used by HFCS-producing facilities in
Mexico to produce HFCS-55, the duties help to limit domestic HFCS
production.) Table T-x shows compensatory duties by product and
company.

In February 1998, the U.S. Corn Refiners' Association (CRA) asked
for a dispute settlement under the North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA) to review the duties. By late 1998, the five 
members had been named to the NAFTA panel. The panel will
commence to review legal briefs submitted by the CRA and SECOFI
in 1999. Parallel to actions undertaken for NAFTA, the United
States Trade Representative (USTR) announced its intention on May
8, 1998, to invoke World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute
settlement proceedings. The USTR has made two formal requests for
the formation of a WTO panel. The first request was blocked by
Mexico. The second request was made on November 25, 1998, and
could not be blocked by Mexico. Progress in the WTO is expected
to be slow.

In May 1998, the USTR initiated an investigation under section
302 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (the Trade Act), in
response to a petition by the CRA, alleging that the Government
of Mexico had denied fair and equitable market opportunities to
U.S. HFCS exporters. The CRA argued that the Mexican Government
had encouraged and supported an agreement between representatives
of the Mexican sugar industry and Mexican soft drink bottling
industry to limit purchases of HFCS by the soft drink bottling
industry. On May 15, 1999, the USTR concluded its formal
investigation phase as required by the terms of the section 302
statute without determining legally that the Mexican Government's
alleged practices were actionable under section 301 of the Trade
Act. However, the USTR noted that its investigation had raised
enough questions about the actions of the Mexican Government to
warrant further examination and continued consultation with the
Mexican Government on issues related to trade in HFCS.

In December 1998, the United States dropped a safeguard measure
meant to protect the U.S. broomcorn broom industry from Mexican
imports. As a result, Mexico dropped its retaliatory duties that
had been put in place on U.S. HFCS imports as well as other U.S.
agricultural imports. As a result, the 12.5 percent ad-valorem
duty was reduced to the NAFTA-specified rate of 6 percent. 

Level of U.S.-Mexico HFCS-55 and HFCS-90 Trade

One issue that complicates trade discussions with Mexico is the
uncertainty with regard to the level of U.S. HFCS shipments to
Mexico. Exports reported by the U.S. Customs Service do not
correspond to those reported by SECOFI. Figure H4 shows HFCS-55
and higher shipments as reported by both sources, along with the
corresponding tariff codes. In this figure, shipment quantities
are reported in 1,000 mt and are not converted to dry weight
equivalence.

The 1996 levels are close to each other: 157,930 mt for U.S.
Customs and 159.77 for SECOFI. The gap widened considerably in
1997: 179,820 mt for U.S. Customs and 338,510 mt for SECOFI. The
SECOFI import amount is 88 percent higher than that reported by
U.S. Customs. The gap narrowed to about 38 percent in 1998:
207,090 mt reported by U.S. Customs and 285,450 mt reported by
SECOFI. Interestingly, the U.S.-sourced numbers show increases in
export levels in spite of Mexican compensatory duties for both
1997 and 1998. The Mexican data show a decrease of over 53,000 mt
from 1997 to 1998.

Early-Season USDA Projections of Sugar Production

By: Stephen L. Haley 1/
------
1/ Agricultural economist, Specialty Crops Branch, Market and
Trade Economics Division, Economic Research Service.
------

Abstract: This article examines methods used in the early
projection period (May-January) by the Interagency Commodity
Estimates Committee (ICEC) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA) for forecasting sugar production. This early period is
important because it includes the time when the sugar tariff-rate
quota is established and when the first tranche is either
allocated or canceled. The quantitatively-based techniques that
the Economic Research Service provides as input to the ICEC
process are discussed. The article describes estimation
techniques for forecasting sugar yield per acre. It also
describes the influence of technological improvements on
increasing sugar yields and the influence of weather. USDA
within-season estimates of sugarcane and sugarbeet yields are
analyzed.

Keywords: beet sugar, cane sugar, forecasts, projections, sugar
production, sugarcane, sugarbeets.

Early-Season USDA Projections of Sugar Production

Each month, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) publishes
its projections of sugar supply and utilization for the
preceding, current, and upcoming (May to September) fiscal years
in the World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates (WASDE)
report. Personnel from several USDA agencies, who constitute the
Sugar Interagency Commodity Estimates Committee (ICEC), have the
responsibility of making projections. These agencies include the
World Agricultural Outlook Board (WAOB), the Foreign Agricultural
Service (FAS), the Farm Service Agency (FSA), and the Economic
Research Service (ERS). The representative from the WAOB chairs
the committee. The projections are closely followed by industry
participants (producers and consumers) and by policymakers. The
projections are instrumental in determining the volume of
tariff-rate quota (TRQ) imports, including the tranches scheduled for
January, March, and May.

The first fiscal year (October/September) sugar production,
consumption, non-TRQ import, and export forecasts are made 5
months before the start of the fiscal year (FY) in the May WASDE.
A complete projection of U.S. sugar supply, utilization, and
ending stock levels is made in October after the volume of TRQ
imports is established subsequent to the September WASDE. The
ICEC meets monthly and updates the projections as new information
becomes available.

The periods during which projections are made and revised can be
divided into early and later stages. These stages are
distinguished by the type of data and analysis available on which
to make the projections. Prior to the February ICEC meeting,
there is not enough Sweetener Market Data (SMD) from FSA to
provide an accurate gauge of the current WASDE projections. Up to
then, information from a variety of sources, including the
National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), is carefully
analyzed, using statistical techniques and econometric
forecasting methodologies in establishing and updating
projections. The February SMD report information through
December, the end of the fiscal year's first quarter. By then,
cane sugar production from Louisiana is largely complete, and
enough beet sugar production has taken place to allow for a
comparison with what is projected. After February, actual
production, consumption, and trade data from SMD play an
increasingly important and larger role in revising projections.

The purpose of this article is to examine more closely the
methods used in the early projection period, especially August
through January, for forecasting sugar production. August is a
good starting point for analysis because it is the first month
that NASS makes yield and production forecasts for sugarbeets and
sugarcane.1/
------
1/ As explained below, projections of sugar yield per acre rely
on yield forecasts from NASS. Although sugar projections are made
starting in May, it is not until August that actual effects of
weather are quantified through yield forecasts in a useful way
for making sugar projections.
------
The August-to-January  period is important because it includes
the time when the TRQ is established (i.e., immediately after the
September WASDE) and when the first tranche is either allocated
or canceled. Both have direct implications for the quantity of
raw sugar imports available to U.S. refiners. The emphasis is
centered on the quantitatively-based techniques that ERS uses as
input into the ICEC process. Although actual projections made
each month are not necessarily the same as those suggested by the
techniques examined herein, the ERS projections focus discussion
in the ICEC meeting and help the committee to arrive at a
consensus.

Projections for Sugar Production in FY 1999

The ICEC relies heavily on NASS reporting and forecasting during
the early part of the sugar production projection cycle. Although
NASS does not forecast sugar production, it reports on the
production of the primary sugarbeet and sugarcane crops from
which the sugar is extracted. The ICEC must join together
NASS-generated forecasts of beet and cane production with information
about extraction rates. NASS does not report on sucrose content
of the primary crops, and is silent on other factors that may
influence the sugar extraction rate.

NASS publishes prospective plantings of sugarbeets at the end of
March, or about 6 months before the start of the upcoming FY.
This and other information, plus an analysis of production
trends, are major inputs into the initial sugar production
projection made in the May WASDE. In June, NASS makes its first
acreage harvested forecast for sugarbeets and sugarcane and
revises its acreage planted forecast for sugarbeets. It is not
until August that NASS makes yield and production forecasts. NASS
continues updating and publishing its forecasts of acreage
harvested, yield, and production through January for sugarbeets
(although there is no report for December) and through March for
sugarcane. Revisions are published in June.

Figure A-1 shows WASDE beet sugar production projections for
August 1998 through February 1999. Beet sugar was projected at
slightly under 4.38 million short tons, raw value (STRV), in
August. As NASS' forecasts of the size of the beet crop
increased, the beet sugar projection was raised, first to 4.42
million STRV in September and then to 4.5 million STRV in
November. However, by February, beet sugar production through
December from  SMD were much lower than anticipated and
inconsistent with the 4.5-million STRV projection from January.
The projection, therefore, was lowered to 4.4 million STRV. At
this point, projecting beet sugar production left the early stage
when another set of information (i.e., SMD) became useful.

Figure A-2 shows changes in beet sugar projections and in NASS'
forecasts of acreage harvested and yield from August through
January. The variables each month are shown as proportions of the
corresponding January amount, so all variables converge at the
value of 1.0 in January. NASS' forecasts of acreage harvested do
not change much--less than 1 percent downward over the period.
The yield forecast shows greater variation and upward movement, 5
percent from August to January. The beet sugar projection also
shows variation and upward movement, but less than the yield.
Also, the sugar projection is imperfectly correlated with the
yield. The strongest correlated period between sugar production
and yield appears between October and November.

Figure A-3 shows WASDE cane sugar production projections through
March for each of the cane producing regions, except Puerto Rico,
which is not covered by NASS. Hawaiian production is spread out
through most of the year. The harvests in Florida and Texas begin
later in the fall and can extend into March and beyond. The
harvest in Louisiana usually starts in late September/early
October and is typically over by the end of December.
Developments late in the season influence NASS forecasts, and
thus are not reflected in sugar production projections until
later. Also, NASS does not separate out cane for sugar from cane
for seed until December. One way is to allocate cane use in the
previous year's shares in computing cane for sugar.

Figure A-3 shows a rather flat profile, especially through
November. The largest increases take place in Florida in December
and January as the cane harvest gets in full swing. The Louisiana
cane sugar projection was increased in December. Compared with
Florida, a greater proportion of the Louisiana cane crop had been
milled into raw sugar, and therefore, there is less uncertainty
regarding the volume of total production.

Figure A-4 shows changes in monthly forecasts of sugarcane
acreage harvested, yield, and cane sugar, all relative to the
March level (similar to Figure A-2). The profiles are fairly flat
through November. Both yield and cane sugar increase from
November to December, and all three increase from December to
January. (NASS increased its forecast of Louisiana acreage
harvested from 385,000 to 400,000 acres.)

ERS Early-Season Projections of Sugar Production

Figure A-5 illustrates the primary method ERS uses to project
sugar production during the early season. The method derives from
the separation of production into two multiplicative components:
acreage harvested and sugar yield per acre. As explained, acreage
harvested forecasts are made by NASS and typically do not vary
that much during the forecast season.

Sugar yield has several features that can be projected based on
available data. The first feature is technical change. Over time,
improvements in several areas have been made that consistently
and predictably increase the degree of recovered sugar per acre.
These areas include milling technology improvements, new mill
capacity expansions, harvesting improvements in the field, better
disease control, improvements in controlling pests and weeds,
etc. Also, for beets, there is the additional recovery of sugar
from the desugaring of molasses.

Besides technical changes, sugar per acre is influenced by
weather-related events. One way to analyze weather-related
effects on sugar yield is to first consider the effect of weather
events on primary product yields (cane and beet yields). The
effect of weather is typically strong on primary product yields,
and the relationship of primary product yields to technical
improvements is less certain than it is for sugar yield.
Technically, this means that there is low correlation between
technical improvements influencing sugar yields and primary
product yields. This low correlation permits interpretation of
changes in primary product yields as chiefly related to random
weather events that change year-to-year. 2/ 

--------
2/ Times-series analysis reveals that Florida cane yields have
been increasing about 0.22 ton a year since 1980 but that only 32
percent of yearly yield variation can be explained by the upward,
technically-induced time trend. Louisiana cane yields show no
consistent trend from 1980 to 1997, although yields since the
mid-1990s have been growing due to the adaption of new enhanced
cane varieties. Texas yields show no trend, and Hawaiian yields
have been declining, probably due to the retirement of large
amounts of productive land from sugar production. Almost all
State beet yields show no trend, and there is no trend
discernable in aggregate U.S. beet yields.
--------

The explicit model representation for sugar yield is:

This equation can be estimated with times-series data to show how
sugar yield has been increasing due to technical improvements
(coefficient B) and how yearly variations in beet or cane yields
have influenced sugar yield (coefficient C). 3/
--------
3/ Low correlation between primary product yields and time
facilitates the interpretation of coefficients "B" and "C".
Otherwise, statistical correlation (called multicollinearity)
would lessen the reliability of the statistical measures used to
measure the significance of the hypothesized relationships
embedded in the coefficient values.
--------
With estimates for A, B, and C, and with NASS forecasts of beet
and cane yields, a projection of sugar yield can be made. This
number can in turn be multiplied by the NASS acreage harvested
forecast to provide a projection for sugar production.

Lack of available data restrict the level of disaggregation in
the analysis. There is only a national beet sugar equation
because beet sugar production is reported only on a national
level (although NASS forecasts sugarbeet production on a State 
level). The beet sugar equation can be estimated net of the
effect of desugared molasses to isolate on the effect that the
other technological factors have on improving beet sugar yield.
This estimation can be done because USDA has estimates of the
sugar produced from the desugaring of beet molasses. Regional
cane sugar equations can be estimated because cane sugar
production is reported regionally.

Table A-1 shows regression equation estimation results. The "B"
and "C" coefficients are shown, along with standard errors, and
computed t-statistics. T-statistic values above 1.96 generally
mean that one can reject the hypothesis that the corresponding
coefficient is insignificantly different from zero. Also shown is
the adjusted r-squared (R2), an indicator of how much of the
variation in sugar yield is accounted for by variations in the
explanatory trend variable (i.e., technical change) and by beet
or cane yields (weather). The closer to 1.0 the R2 is, the
better.

Estimation results are generally good. The adjusted R2s are high,
especially for the cane equations. The beet sugar adjusted R2s
are not quite as high (0.55 to 0.61), partly influenced by
aggregation over a wide set of differing producing-area
conditions. The "B" coefficients are significantly greater than
zero for all equations except Texas and Hawaii. All "C"
coefficients are significantly positive, as hypothesized.

The coefficient for beet sugar, net of desugared molasses, is
less than half the value of the corresponding coefficient in the
beet sugar equation. This would seem to indicate that, on
average, beet molasses desugaring has accounted for about half of
trend growth in beet sugar yield.

The sugar yield equations are used to project sugar per acre. The
projection is multiplied by NASS forecasts of acreage harvested
to project sugar production for the cane regions and for U.S.
beet sugar. The statistical properties of the equations can be
used to provide confidence intervals (i.e., upper and lower
bounds) for the projections.

A qualification to the approach involves the accuracy of
within-season yields relative to the final estimates. The final yield
estimates are those used in the sugar yield equations, but the
within-season forecasts of final yields are used for 
within-season projections of the sugar yield. First-yield forecasts
are made in August, 2 to 4 months prior to the harvest. Each month
closer to the harvest provides additional information for making
the forecasts more accurate. Given times-series data on
forecasted yields and final estimates, it is possible to
indirectly quantify how much is learned with the passage of time
to the harvest season.

Within-Season USDA Yield Forecasts

The model used to measure pre-harvest yield forecast accuracy is:

Desirable estimation results would be that coefficient "A" is
equal to zero, that coefficient "B" is equal to one, and that a
very high degree of the variance in the final yield is explained
by the estimated equation. Table A-2 shows results for U.S. beet
yields, and table A-3 shows results for regional U.S. cane
yields. The tables show estimates for coefficients "A" and "B",
along with their standard errors and two sets of t-statistics.
The first set relates to the hypothesis that "B" is significantly
different from zero. A value of 1.96 or above is sufficient to
conclude that the hypothesis is correct. The second t-statistic
relates to the hypothesis that "B" is significantly different
from one. A t-statistic less than 1.96 would indicate that this
hypothesis cannot be rejected.

The tables also show the adjusted R2 (explained above) and the
Schwarz Information Criterion (SIC). The SIC is an estimate of
the 1-step ahead out-of-sample prediction error variance. A
smaller SIC relative to other SICs within a grouping indicates
that the equation is a better predictor of the final yield
estimate. It would be expected that the closer-to-harvest yield
equation would explain more of the final yield variance (higher
adjusted R2) and be a better predictor (lower SIC relative to
earlier month yield forecasts). Month-to-month growth in adjusted
R2 and the decline in SIC are rough indicators of how much
information is learned between months in successfully forecasting
the final yield.

Table A-2 shows results for U.S. beets, aggregated across States
and also at individual State levels, from August through
November. Aggregate U.S. results are the most useful because the
beet sugar equation (table A-1) makes use of only the aggregate
U.S. beet estimate. All "B" coefficients are significantly
greater than zero, but rise to levels significantly above one.
There is consistent growth in adjusted R2s, from 39 percent in
August, to 63 percent (September), 71 percent (October), and 93
percent (November). The SICs fall each month closer to harvest.
There is an especially large drop going from October to November,
as much of the harvest winds down and information about it
becomes known and incorporated into the forecast.

Table A-2 also shows results for individual States. Results in
six of the 10 States are very similar to the aggregate results.
These States include Colorado, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana,
Nebraska, and North Dakota. With each passing month the adjusted
R2s increase consistently, and there is a relatively large drop
in the SIC going from October to November. The "B" coefficients
are all significantly greater than zero, and statistically very
close to one (unlike the aggregate U.S. result). California
results are close to fitting the pattern, but there is not much
difference between October and November--practically the same
values for adjusted R2s and for the SIC. Hard-to-forecast States
include Idaho, Oregon, and Wyoming. Until November, all R2s are
low and only rise between 45 to 60 percent by November.

Table A-3 shows results for the U.S. cane regions. Results for
mainland producing areas of Florida, Louisiana, and Texas show a
pattern of relatively low adjusted R2s until January. The largest
decreases in respective SICs take place in January as well. These
results indicate that hard-to-predict late-season developments
are crucial to cane yield forecasting. Steadier Hawaiian results
(i.e., more gradual changes in adjusted R2s and SICs) are
reflective of production taking place throughout the year. Thus,
late season developments matter less in yield forecasting. The
"B" coefficients for Hawaii, Louisiana, and Texas (except August)
are all significantly greater than zero. The "B" coefficients for
Florida are only significantly greater than zero in September and
January.

In conclusion, results indicate that more is known earlier in the
season for sugarbeets than for sugarcane, even relative to the
respective harvest periods for each. However, once beet or cane
production is known with high certainty, implications for cane
sugar production seem to be known with greater certainty than for
beet sugar production: the test statistics for the cane equations
in table A-1 are better than those for beets.4/
------
4/  Another source of uncertainty for beet sugar production
derives from the early-campaign harvesting of the beet crop. If
beets are harvested in September and processed that same month,
the production gets recorded in the previous year's totals. Crop
and fiscal years are now the same and do not begin until October
1. A small amount of Louisiana cane sugar production is typically
processed in September as well.
------
An explanation is that cane is processed into raw sugar sooner
after harvest than are the beets. Beets are stored in sheds and
piles for a longer period during which sucrose deterioration can
take place. This is especially true for the Red River producing
area, where processing from crops harvested in October can
continue on into May and June of the next calendar year.List of Tables
Page

World Production, Supply, and Distribution

   1. World production, supply, and distribution, centrifugal
sugar

 World and U.S. Sugar and Corn Sweetener Prices

   2. World refined sugar price, monthly, quarterly, and by
calendar and fiscal year
   3. World raw sugar price, monthly, quarterly, and by calendar
and fiscal year
   4. U.S. raw sugar price, duty fee paid, New York, monthly,
quarterly, and by calendar and fiscal year
   5. U.S. wholesale refined beet sugar price, Midwest markets,
monthly, quarterly, and by calendar and fiscal year
   6. U.S. retail refined sugar price, monthly, quarterly, and by
calendar and fiscal year
   7. U.S. wholesale list price for glucose syrup, Midwest
markets, monthly, quarterly, and by calendar and fiscal year
   8. U.S. wholesale list price for dextrose, Midwest markets,
monthly, quarterly, and by calendar and fiscal year
   9. U.S. spot price for HFCS-42, Midwest markets, monthly,
quarterly, and by calendar and fiscal year
 10. U.S. producer price index for HFCS and sugar, monthly 
 11. U.S. consumer price index for sugar and selected
sweetener-containing products
 12. Sugarbeet prices, by State and United States, 1980-97
 13. Sugarcane prices, by State, 1980-97

U.S. Sugar Supply and Use

 14. U.S. sugarbeet crops: Area planted, acres harvested, yield
per acre, and production, by State and region
 15. U.S. sugarcane: Area, yield, production, output, recovery
rate, and sugar yield per acre, crop years 
 16. U.S. beet and cane sugar production (including Puerto Rico),
fiscal year and share of total
 17. U.S.sugarbeet area, yield, and production, 1990-1998 
 18. U.S. production of beet sugar and cane sugar by State,
monthly, quarterly, fiscal, calendar, and crop year
 19. U.S. cane and beet sugar deliveries, monthly, quarterly, and
by fiscal and calendar year
 20. U.S. sugar deliveries for human consumption by type of user,
quarterly and calendar year
 21. U.S. sugar imports under tariff-rate quota (TRQ), by country
 22. U.S. sugar stocks held by primary distributors, by quarters
 23. U.S. sugar (including Puerto Rico) supply and use, fiscal
years 1981-85
 24. U.S. sugar (including Puerto Rico) supply and use, fiscal
years 1986-91
 25. U.S. sugar (including Puerto Rico) supply and use, fiscal
years 1992-2000
 26. Monthly estimates of fiscal 1997 U.S. sugar supply and use
 27. Monthly estimates of fiscal 1998 U.S. sugar supply and use
 28. Monthly estimates of fiscal 1999 U.S. sugar supply and use
 29. U.S. beet pulp exports, by major destinations, calendar year

Mexican Sugar Supply, Use, and Prices
 
 30. Mexican production, supply, and distribution, centrifugal
sugar
 31. Mexican sugar prices, monthly, 1995-99

Corn Sweetener Supply, Use, and Trade

  32. U.S. wet-milled use of field corn, crop year
  33. U.S. high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) deliveries (including
Puerto Rico), quarterly, fiscal, and calendar year
  34. U.S. high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) production (including
Puerto Rico), quarterly, fiscal, and calendar year
  35. U.S. high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) supply and use
(including Puerto Rico), calendar year
  36. U.S. dextrose supply and use (including Puerto Rico), by 
calendar year
  37. U.S. glucose supply and use (including Puerto Rico),
calendar year
  38. Net cost of corn starch to U.S. wet-millers, Midwest
markets
  39. U.S. corn sweetener exports to Mexico and Canada, fiscal
years 1993-99
  40. U.S. corn sweetener imports from Mexico and Canada, fiscal
years 1993-99
  41. U.S. HFCS trade with Mexico and Canada, monthly 1989-99
  42. U.S. corn refinery exports

U.S. Imports of Sugar Syrups

  43. U.S. total imports of sugar syrup, harmonized tariff code
1702.90.4000, monthly 1993-99

U.S. Costs of Production

  44. Sugar beet production cash costs and returns, 1997-98
  45. Sugar beet production economic costs and returns, 1997-98
  46. Beet sugar: Processing costs per net ton of sugarbeets and
pound of refined sugar,  by cost item and area, 1996 crop
  47. Beet sugar: Processing costs per net ton of sugarbeets and
pound of refined sugar, by cost item and area, 1997 crop

U.S. Molasses Supply, Utilization, and Prices

  48. Feed and industrial molasses, U.S. production, inshipments,
imports, and exports, 1992-97
  49. Feed and industrial molasses: estimated utilization,
1992-97
  50. U.S. molasses blackstrap prices
  51. U.S. imports of molasses, by country, 1989-98 

U.S. Maple Syrup Production, Prices, and Trade 

  52. U.S. maple syrup production, imports, exports, and prices, 
calendar year
  53. U.S. maple syrup production and value, by State, calendar
years
  54. U.S. maple syrup exports, by country, calendar year

U.S. Honey Production and Trade 

  55. U.S. honey production, imports, exports, stocks, and
average price, calendar year
  56. Honey: Number of colonies, yield, production, stocks,
price, and value, by top producing State s and United States,
1986-98 
  57. U.S. honey imports, by importing country, calendar year

U.S. Consumption of Caloric Sweeteners

  58. U.S. (including Puerto Rico) total consumption of caloric
sweeteners, calendar year
  59. U.S. (including Puerto Rico) per capita consumption of
caloric sweeteners, calendar year

Special Article Tables

A1. Regression results: Sugar yield per acre, 1980-97.
A2. Regression results: USDA monthly forecasts of U.S. beet
yields, 1980-98 
A3. Regression results: USDA monthly forecasts of U.S. cane
yields, 1980-97

List of Figures

Figure  1   U.S. HFCS-55 Exports to Mexico and the World, 
1996-98.
Figure  2. Ratio of HFCS-42 Spot Price to Beet Sugar Price,
1995-99
Figure  3. Net Corn Cost as Proportion of HFCS-42 Price
Figure  4. U.S. HFCS-55 Shipments to Mexico, January-December
Figure  5. U.S. Raw Sugar Prices
Figure  6. World and U.S. Raw Sugar Prices
Figure  7. U.S. Beet and Cane Sugar Production
Figure  8. U.S. Wholesale Refined Beet Sugar Prices
Figure  9. U.S. Sugar Production and Net Imports
Figure 10. U.S. Sugar Consumption

Special Article Figures

Figure A-1. FY 1999 WASDE Beet Sugar Projections
Figure A-2. FY 1999 Sugarbeet Acreage Harvested, Yield, and Sugar
Figure A-3. FY 1999 WASDE Cane Sugar Projections
Figure A-4. FY 1999 Sugarcane Acreage Harvested, Yield, and Sugar
Figure A-5. Projecting Sugar Production Prior to Cane/Beet
Harvest

Autofax Access to Sugar-Related Data (ERS)

From your fax machine, call (202) 694-5700 and listen to voice
prompts to have the following documents automatically downloaded
to your fax machine. You may request up to three documents in one
phone call.

Directory Identification Numbers and Titles:

Sugar and Sweeteners:

12626  World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates for Sugar

12627  3 pages
       (1) Wholesale refined beet sugar prices, Midwest market,
1960-present, monthly, quarterly, annual, fiscal
       (2) U.S. raw sugar price, duty-fee paid, New York,
1960-present, monthly, quarterly, annual, fiscal
       (3) U.S. retail refined sugar prices, 1975-present
monthly, quarterly, annual

12628 5 pages
      (1) Wholesale list prices for HFCS-42, Midwest market,
1975-1995. monthly, quarterly, annual, fiscal
      (2) Wholesale list prices for HFCS-55, Midwest market,
1981-1995, monthly, quarterly, annual, fiscal
      (3) Wholesale list prices for glucose corn syrup, Midwest
market, 1975-present, monthly, quarterly, annual, fiscal
      (4) Wholesale list prices for dextrose, Midwest market,
1975-present, monthly, quarterly, annual, fiscal
      (5) U.S. producer price index for HFCS and sugar, monthly,
annual, 1986-present

12629  2 pages
      (1) World raw sugar prices, 1960-present, monthly, 
quarterly, annual, fiscal
      (2) World refined sugar prices, 1980-present, monthly, 
quarterly, annual, fiscal

12630  2 pages
      (1) U.S. and world sugar prices starting 1990-present,
monthly, quarterly, annual, fiscal

12631 3 pages
      (1) Net cost of corn starch to U.S. wet-millers, Midwest
markets, 1985-present

12632 3 pages
      (1) U.S. Sugar (including Puerto Rico) supply and use,
fiscal years, 1980/81-present

12633 10 pages
       (1) The Beet Sugar Industry of Minnesota and North Dakota:
Current  Situation and Prospects, by Ron Lord, September 1994
Sugar and  Sweetener Situation and Outlook Report

12634  Text Boxes, Graphs, and Tables, September 1997 S&O Report,
10 pages 
      "HFCS Trade Dispute With Mexico," by Jacqueline Salsgiver;
"Origin of the U.S. Sugar Import Tariff-Rate Quota Shares", by
Nydia Suarez; and "Changing Structure of the U.S. Refined Sugar
Market," by Ron Lord and Robert Barry, September 1997 Sugar and
Sweetener Situation and Outlook Report

For more information on specialty crops, contact the following
subject matter specialists:

Sugar & Sweetener: Fannye Jolly, (202) 694-5249 

Vegetables: Gary Lucier (202) 694-5253; Tobacco: Tom Capehart
(202) 694-5311
Fruit & Tree Nuts: Susan Pollack (202)694-5251 & Agnes Perez
(202)694-5255
Industrial Uses and Alternative Agriculture: Lewrene Glaser (202)
694-5246

Internet Access to Sugar-Related Data

Home Pages

Main Data Directory:
http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/cgi-usda/agency.cgi?ers

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA):
http://www.usda.gov

Economic Research Service (ERS):
http://www.econ.ag.gov

Office of the Chief Economist, USDA:
http://www.usda.gov/agency/oce/

World Agricultural Outlook Board (WAOB):
http://www.usda.gov/agency/oce/waob/waob.htm

National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS):
http://www.usda.gov/nass/

Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS):
http://www.fas.usda.gov/

Reports

ERS Sugar & Sweetener Situation and Outlook Reports (including
text of Reports):
http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/reports/erssor/specialty/sss-bb

ERS Sugar Yearbook Data (September 1998): 
http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/data-sets/specialty/89019/

Sugar Statistical Compendium (1991):
http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/data-sets/specialty/91006/

U.S. Corn Sweetener Statistical Compendium (1993): 
http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/data-sets/specialty/94002/

Farm Sector Cost of Production:

  Sugarbeets:
     Analysis, 1996-97:
http://www.econ.ag.gov/briefing/fbe/car/beets2.htm
     Data, 1981-97:
http://www.econ.ag.gov/briefing/fbe/car/beets3.htm
 
 Sugarcane:
     Analysis, 1995-96:
http://www.econ.ag.gov/briefing/fbe/car/cane2.htm
     Data, 1981-96:
http://www.econ.ag.gov/briefing/fbe/car/cane3.htm

World Agriculture Supply and Demand Estimate Report (WASDE):
http://www.usda.gov/oce/waob/wasde/wasde.htm

February 1999 Outlook Forum: 
http://www.usda.gov/agency/oce/waob/outlook99/99speeches.htm

Sugar: U.S. Sugar Re-Export Programs, Foreign Agricultural
Service (FAS):
http://www.fas.usda.gov/htp/sugar/sugarpg.html

Foreign Agricultural Service Report from Foreign Countries
(includes sugar reports):
http://www.fas.usda.gov/scriptsw/AttacheRep/attache_frm.idc

Sweetener Market Data, Farm Service Agency (FSA):
http://www.fsa.usda.gov/ao/epas/dsa/sugar/coversu.htm

END_OF_FILE