MPC REPORT NO. 03-151

U.S. Containerized Grain & Oilseed

Exporters - Industry Profile and Survey - Phase II

Kimberly Vachal

Tamara VanWechel

Heidi Reichert

July 2003
U.S. CONTAINERIZED GRAIN & OILSEED 

EXPORTS INDUSTRY SURVEY 

Research by 

Kimberly Vachal 

Tamara VanWechel 

Upper Great Plains Transportation Institute 

North Dakota State University 

and 

Heidi Reichert 

Transportation and Marketing Programs 

United States Department of Agriculture 

Research for 

Transportation and Marketing Programs 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

United States Department of Agriculture 

July 2003 

Phase I Report: MPC 02-132, “U.S. Containerized Grain and Oilseed Exports – Industry Profile: Phase I” 

(April 2002 – Vachal, Reichert) 
Disclaimer 

The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and accuracy 

of the information presented herein. This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the 

Department of Transportation, University Transportation Centers Program, in the interest of information 

exchange. The U.S. government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof. 
i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Containerization has evolved from an industry serving niche markets to an industry creating niche 

market opportunities. While grain and oilseed industry is dominated by bulky, homogenized product 

marketing that is heavily reliant on economies of scale in delivering competitively priced commodities, 

technological advances, foreign market privatization, and declining global market transaction costs have 

supported diversification of this industry in niche markets such as small-volume containerized products. 

The findings of this research suggest an established and growing U.S. shipper population is active in 

marketing containerized grains and oilseed products. 

A survey of shippers suggests that premiums for containerized grain and oilseed products are $5 per 

hundredweight, compared to the local bulk counterpart market. The net return to shippers is opaque as 

business practices and market fundamental influence the costs associated with delivering the product to a 

customer overseas versus a local grain terminal or processor. Assuming market activity is positively 

correlated to profitability, the grain and oilseed container shippers would seem to be achieving 

acceptable levels of profit. Shippers report that container exports increased annually between 2000 and 

2002, and are projecting it will increase another 20 percent by 2005. Although many factors affect 

industry ability to realize this growth, shippers deem ocean freight rates as most crucial. Ocean liner 

routes/services, distance to container terminal, and foreign buyer information are also rated with above 

average importance. 
ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 1 

2. CONSTRUCTING AND ADMINISTERING THE SURVEY........................................................ 3 

3. INDUSTRY PROFILE ..................................................................................................................... 5 

3.1 Shipper Characteristics ........................................................................................................... 5 

3.2 Market Practices ..................................................................................................................... 6 

3.3 Container Export Activity....................................................................................................... 8 

3.4 Market Growth Factors......................................................................................................... 10 

4. CONCLUSION............................................................................................................................... 12

5. REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................ 13 

APPENDIX A.......................................................................................................................................... 14 
iii

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure 1.1 U.S. Containerized Soybean and Animal Feed Exports.......................................................2 

Figure 3.1 State Locations of Grain and Oilseed Shippers....................................................................6 

Figure 3.2 Containerized Grain and Oilseed Exports ............................................................................9 

LIST OF TABLES 

Table 1.1 Containerized U.S. Exports, Share of Market by Weight......................................................1 

Table 3.1 Market Growth Factors........................................................................................................11
1

1. INTRODUCTION

Intermodal freight transport has been transformed by the technological and marketing innovations of 

recent decades. The early (pre-1960) container ocean market offered retrofitted dry cargo and oil tanker 

vessels with capacities under 1,000 twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs). Today’s new-build container 

ships offer capacities and associated economies of scale for hauling over 6,000 TEUs with service options 

such as refrigeration. High-value cargos have long utilized the container as a cost-effective means for 

relocating products to serve foreign customers. More recently, operational efficiencies, increased vessel 

capacity, and decreasing container construction costs have created opportunities for lower-value cargos to 

also utilize this flexible and cost-effective ocean freight transport option. As industries have integrated the 

container option into their logistics operations, the scope of container markets, equipment, and products 

has grown substantially. One segment in the lower-value container cargo has developed in the agricultural 

industry. It is the containerized grain and oilseed products – traditionally handled in large, bulk 

movements – investigated in this research. 

The overall trend toward containerization in agricultural shipping is evident in temporal statistics. By 

weight, 15 percent of all agricultural product exports are shipped by container, up from 9 percent in 1992. 

By value, over 52 percent of all U.S. agricultural trade is now shipped via container. This trend is evident 

in traditionally bulk-shipped commodities as well. Table 1.1 shows the percent of containerized 

shipments for soybeans, animal feed, and pulses (commodities typically shipped bulk) in 1992 and 2002 

(Port Import Export Reporting Services). 

 

It is estimated that over 600 U.S. companies are currently involved in shipping containerized grain and 

grain products to over 130 countries (Port Import Export Reporting Services). The prevalence of 

container shipments has trended upward over the past decade, as illustrated by annual export volumes for 

animal feed and soybean markets. Container export TEU volumes have increased by 500 and 200 percent 

for soybean and animal feed industries, respectively, over the past decade.1

 The animal feed and soybean 

markets are selected for this illustration (Figure 1.1) as they have been identified as larger and more 

consistent container markets among the bulk grain and oilseed products in historical data (Port Import 

Export Reporting Service). 

 

1

 This estimate includes barley, cottonseed, corn, flaxseed, oats, rye, sorghum, soybeans, sunflowers, and wheat. 

Table 1.1 Containerized U.S. Exports, Share of 

Market by Weight 

 1992 2002

Soybeans 0.4% 1.8%

Animal Feed 2.6% 6.7%

Pulses 66.0% 70.0%

Source: PIERS 
2

Although data sources do offer evidence that this container segment of the U.S. grain and oilseed industry 

exists, the activities and expectations are largely characterized by anecdotal information. Export data does 

suggest that this industry is experiencing growth as containerized grain and oilseed exports, considering 

soybean, corn, wheat, barley, sorghum, and oats, totaled nearly 25,700 TEUs in 2002. This volume 

represents a 49 percent increase in volume compared to 2000 container exports of these commodities. 

Pulse crops, which were also considered in this study, totaled 6,500 TEUs in 2002 compared to 16,600 

TEUs in 2000. Pulse crop exports may vary significantly year-to-year as this market is tied rather closely 

to U.S. food aid programs. As U.S. agricultural producers seek to serve existing markets with new 

products and identify opportunities to serve new markets, containerization offers a broad scope in its 

flexibility and globalization. 

Containerization allows the producer to extend control of the product from field to customer rather than 

field to local terminal, introducing new sources for opportunity, risk, and profit. Thus, it is important to 

understand current practices and expectations of shippers so that proactive and prudent decisions support 

continued diversification into this sector of the global agricultural market. The purpose of this research is 

to develop a profile of the containerized grain and oilseed market with primary data. This research 

augments the broad industry profile developed with secondary data sources in the first phase of this 

project (Vachal and Reichert, 2002). The next section in this research includes an overview of the survey 

methodology and administration. The findings, including a profile industry structure, commodity 

characteristics, marketing practices, and expectations, are presented in section three. The final component 

is a summary of the research process and its conclusions. 

Figure 1.1 U.S. Containerized Soybean and Animal Feed Exports

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

199219941996199820002002

Thousands of 20-foot containers

Soybeans Animal feed
3

2. CONSTRUCTING AND ADMINISTERING THE 

SURVEY 

Investigating this niche grain market is a challenge considering the focus market and participant base is 

loosely defined as U.S. shippers exporting containerized unprocessed grain and oilseeds. Therefore, a 

committee of non-governmental and private industry experts was consulted in developing the survey 

instrument and identifying the survey population. The cooperative survey development process was 

beneficial in defining the scope and content of the survey, and in supplementing the initial mailing list. It 

was determined that a concise mail survey, directed as ascertaining baseline information about shippers 

and activities, would likely elicit the best response from shippers. The resulting survey product was 

designed to cover four aspects of the grain container market including shipper characteristics, marketing 

practices, commodity activity, and industry growth factors. 

The multi-phase survey process included in this project was a learning experience onto itself. An initial 

mail survey was sent to 570 potential shipper respondents. It was supplemented by a phone survey of a 

random sample of these shippers and a phone survey of 40 additional potential containerized grain and 

oilseed shippers. In total, a response rate of 37 percent was generated from the response of 228 businesses 

to the survey. Twenty percent of these businesses reported they were active in marketing containerized 

grain and oilseeds to foreign customers. 

A test of the survey was conducted by eliciting the cooperation of several shippers, known to be active in 

the industry, to complete the survey prior to the initial mailing. Minor modifications were made to survey 

content based on the suggestions of these shippers. The initial survey was administered via mail. 

Approximately 570 surveys were mailed to shippers located throughout the United States, with the survey 

population residing in 38 of the 48 contiguous states. The largest population segment – 133 of the 

potential shipper respondents or 23 percent – resided in California. These shippers were selected as they 

had been identified as grain and oilseed container exporters via the Journal of Commerce Port Import 

Export Reporting Services (PIERS). The list also included several shippers who had been identified by 

the industry advisory group as missing on the original mailing list. The mail survey elicited 14 responses 

from grain container exporters. Due to the poor response rate to the initial survey a second mailing of the 

survey to non-respondents was not conducted. 

 

At this point, it was determined that a follow-up version of the survey would be a phone survey of a 

random sample of shippers who had received the initial mail survey. Approximately one-third of the 

initial survey population was contacted via phone. As with the mail survey, the phone survey included a 

qualifier question asking the business if they shipped field crops by container. The phone survey quickly 

revealed factors that had resulted in the low response to the mail survey. The primary reasons for nonresponse were that the shipper was not active in shipping containerized grain and oilseed products or that 

the business was strictly a third-party participant in the transaction who was providing logistics services. 

Both sources of non-response were expected as we selected a broad scope for identifying the shipper 

population based on standard industrial classification (SIC) product codes and commodity descriptions 

used in shipment documentation, but the prevalence of these businesses in the potential shipper 

population had been grossly underestimated. Only one shipper who was contacted and confirmed 

participation in shipping containerized grain products declined to participate in the survey. The phone 

follow-up resulted in the addition of 188 responses. Of these responses, 31 confirmed they were active 

grain and oilseed shippers and completed the remainder of the survey. 

A supplement to the initial shipper population was made as grain container export workshop attendees – 

these workshop events were conducted by the Transportation and Marketing Programs of the United 
4

States Department of Agriculture between 2000 and 2002 – were contacted via phone to complete the 

survey. While 40 potential shippers were contacted via phone to complete the survey, only three shippers 

were actively exporting grain or oilseed via container. Many participants contacted offered that they had 

not yet begun to actively employ the workshop knowledge gained regarding the export of grain and 

oilseed products. In addition, a segment of the workshop attendees were non-government entities seeking 

to gather information for their constituents but not actually planning to engage in market transactions. 

The addition of the three responses from the USDA workshop population increased survey response to 

228, and number of surveys completed by active grain and oilseed shippers to 48. 

The public-private cooperation approach to survey development was a success in terms of collecting 

useful industry data and gaining an understanding of shippers in the industry. The resulting instrument 

includes a concise set of questions that is directed ascertaining baseline information about shippers 

involved in the export of containerized grain and oilseeds. The survey response rate of 37 percent is low, 

but putting it in the context of the wide rather than narrow scope used to identify over 600 potential 

respondents and the very competitive nature of a global grain business, these responses are assumed to be 

reflective of the industry. 

The infrequency of shippers in the business population group suggests that third party facilitators are 

common in managing the marketing and logistics of container shipments. In addition, it is somewhat 

difficult to distinguish a subset of the container shipping population given the somewhat broad product 

categories that can be applied in the shipment bill of lading. The profile information presented in 

subsequent sections is based on 47 of 48 shipper responses, as one survey was discarded because the 

single product marketed via container was hay. Responses received for the survey are used to develop the 

profile of the containerized grain and oilseed industry that is presented in the following sections. While 

the profile may not offer holistic insight into this growing market segment, it provides valuable insight for 

an area that is largely void of public-source information needed to fulfill basic investment, planning, and 

policy activities. 
5

3. INDUSTRY PROFILE

A mail and phone survey of 610 container businesses elicited 228 responses for a 37 percent response 

rate. Twenty percent of these shippers confirmed that they are active in marketing grains and oilseeds via 

container. The infrequency of shippers in the business population group suggests third party facilitators 

are common in managing the marketing and logistics of container shipments. In addition, the initial 

survey population was somewhat difficult to distinguish as a subset of the container shipping population 

given the somewhat broad product categories that can be applied in the shipment bill of lading. 

Responses from 47 shippers who are active in exporting grain and/or oilseeds via container are used to 

develop a profile of the containerized grain and oilseed industry. 

The profile is developed in the next four sections describing shipper characteristics, marketing practices, 

business activity, contract negotiation, and industry growth factors. The profile includes responses from 

19 states covering 13 commodities. The limited sample size requires that information be reported for the 

national aggregate. In addition, individual commodity information is limited to only a few crops that are 

most commonly reported in the surveys. The geographic and product scope of responses does offer 

insight into the coverage these responses allow for viewing this specialized segment of the grain and 

oilseed market. 

3.1 Shipper Characteristics

The business size, in terms of annual volumes, averaged 187 TEUs per year between 2000 and 2002. 

Average annual business volumes trended upward over the three year period, from 169 to 182 to 212, in 

2000, 2001, and 2002, respectively. In addition to the upward trend in volumes, the number of shippers 

increased over the three-year period. As more shippers entered the market in recent years, the number of 

respondents reporting containerized export grain and oilseed volumes increased by 38 percent from 29 in 

2000 to 46 in 2002. Total grain and oilseed TEUs reported by shippers increased from 7,459 to 9,766 

TEUs between 2000 and 2002. Shipper volumes for 2002 are equal to 38 percent of the total volume of 

U.S. containerized grain and oilseed exports. Shipper respondents appear optimistic about future 

opportunities for containerized export of grain and oilseed products as shipments are projected to continue 

increasing to 10,680 TEUs in 2004 and 11,695 TEUs in 2005. If the expected 2005 volumes are realized, 

respondent containerized grain and oilseed export volumes will grow by 57 percent over the five-year 

period. 

The containerized grain and oilseed shipper respondents are generally experienced as they have been in 

business for an average of 23 years, with 80 percent of the respondents in business for 10 years or more. 

Years of diversification into containerized shipping ranges from 2 to 42 years, with over half the 

respondents active in containerized marketing of grain for under 10 years. The business structure is 

predominately corporation, with over two-thirds of the respondents operating under this arrangement. 

Independent and partnership organizations each accounted for 10 percent of the shipper respondent 

business structures, with limited liability corporations and subsidiaries reported as other business 

structures. 

Primary business location for shipper respondents included 19 states, as illustrated in Figure 3.1. 

Primary intermodal terminals identified by shippers included 23 facilities from Seattle, Washington; 

Portland, Oregon; and Los Angeles, California on the west coast to Columbus, Ohio and Texas sites in 

Amarillo, Dallas, and Houston on the east and south boundaries of facility locations. Washington hosts 

the greatest number of terminals identified by shippers, in addition to Seattle the ports of Spokane, Pasco, 
6

and Tacoma are each identified as primary intermodal terminals in survey responses. Three Illinois 

locations accessed by shippers include Assumption, Beardstown, and Chicago. Other locations included 

Denver, Colorado; Lewiston and Twin Falls, Idaho; Detroit, Michigan; Dilworth and Minneapolis, 

Minnesota; Kansas City, Missouri; Omaha, Nebraska; and Memphis, Tennessee. 

Distance from business location to primary intermodal terminal ranged from 0 to over 2,000 miles, 

averaging 366 for all shippers. Approximately 40 percent of the shippers are within 100 miles of their 

primary intermodal terminal. Considering the proximity of product to terminal, in terms of volume 

marketed by individual shippers, 30 percent of the volume requires drayage under 100 miles and 76 

percent is moved under 350 miles to reach the primary container terminal. Thus, the vast majority of 

grain and oilseed volume is originated from shippers within 350 miles of an intermodal terminal. 

3.2 Market Practices 

Gaining insight into market practices is important in understanding fundamentals of the containerized 

grain and oilseed export market segment. This insight is useful in discussing the potential impacts of 

policy, research, and investment. Market practices consider the scope and operation of the activities such 

as contracts, market development, business management, and logistics. 

Contract negotiation is a critical factor in the success of container market strategies. In the contract, the 

ocean carrier generally guarantees shipper terms, such as time, rate, and fees, in exchange for the 

shipper’s guarantee of container volume over the life of the contract. Terms are specific to routes and 

more than one route may be included in a single contract. Contract negotiation is complex, therefore 

shippers opt to involve a third party in the negotiation of a contract with the ocean carriers or completely 

Figure 3.1 State Locations of Grain and Oilseed 

Shippers 

Shipper 

Business 

Location
7

contract out to third party to handle logistics for market transactions. In addition to complexities, volumes 

are usually inversely related to rates so shippers may see an opportunity to access lower rates in accessing 

the third party negotiated rates. 

A majority of the shippers, 51 percent, responding to the survey handle negotiations with ocean carriers 

on rates and terms themselves. Freight forwarders or brokers are second among possible alternatives for 

contract negotiation. The customer was identified as the party responsible for the container rates and 

service terms for 8 percent of the respondents. The Ocean Shipping Reform Act enacted in 1999 was seen 

as a possible catalyst for increased development of marketing consortiums, but this activity seems to have 

been limited as only 2 percent of shippers indicate contract negotiation through a marketing consortium. 

Shippers report they negotiate annual contracts with an average of 83 foreign buyers. The number of 

buyers served by an individual shipper ranges from one to 600. Over half the respondents report they 

contract with 12 or fewer foreign buyers. Over half the shippers report the typical duration of their 

contracts is 12 months. The average duration of contracts is reported to be nine months, with a range from 

two to 17 months. 

Two final inquiries into shipper contracts indicate that lead time is often limited for these sales and that 

the delivery point is usually specified in the sale contract. The lead time, or duration between contract 

signage and container shipment, averaged four months. Although the lead time ranged between one and 

12 months, one month is the most commonly reported duration. Approximately one-third of survey 

respondents reported that shipment typically occurs within a month of contract signage. If average lead 

time is extended to two months, over 60 percent of respondents indicate shipment typically will have 

occurred. Over three-quarters of the shippers indicate the delivery point is specified at the time of sale so 

the shipper has prior knowledge for routing. The lead time and delivery point may be an important factor 

in the ability of shipper to cost effectively access available container capacity and integrate the shipment 

into the global market channels. 

One component of the container market movement that may or may not be included in the contract 

negotiation is drayage, or movement from shipper facility to container terminal. Utilization of freight 

forwarders dominates the options available to the shipper in repositioning the loaded container at the 

terminal. Approximately 48 percent of shippers indicate a freight forwarder is hired to manage drayage 

activity. Alternatives, including handling the drayage internally and contracting out to a trucking 

company, are each used by 27 percent of the respondents. Only 13 percent of the respondents indicate the 

ocean carrier handles drayage for their containerized grain and oilseed exports. Note that the percentages 

given above, for both the contract negotiation party and drayage party total, may sum to a number greater 

than 100 as more than one alternate may be used by an individual shipper depending on factors such as 

shipment route, contract terms, and cost effectiveness. 

Regarding the geographic scope of markets, shippers were asked to specify which regions they have 

served with containerized field products. Global regions rather than countries are used to ensure 

confidentiality for individual business activities. The largest single region, in terms of number of shippers 

reporting container shipments, is Asia. Approximately 91 percent of the shippers responding to the survey 

reported business activity within the Asian region. Europe is second among regions identified as markets 

for U.S. exports of containerized grain and oilseed products with 54 percent of shippers reporting activity 

in Europe. The Middle East is identified as a market by 22 percent of the respondents, making it third 

among regions shippers access in marketing containers. North America is fourth among regions as 17 

percent of shippers indicate they market via container within this market region. Other regional markets 

with fewer than 10 percent of shipper respondents indicating activity include Africa, Australia, 

Caribbean/South America, CIS, and India. The geographic scope in markets identified by shippers 

indicates a diverse customer base for this specialized segment of the grain and oilseed industry. 
8

To gain insight into the potential for market development and current market activities, shippers were 

asked to indicate their reason for shipping via container. Given an array of customers served by the 

containerized export market several factors are indicated in shipper responses. The most common reasons 

for containerization are buyer request, food grade product, and non-genetically modified products with 

54, 30, and 28 percent of respondents offering these reasons, respectively. Slightly more than 20 percent 

of shippers suggest that deficiencies in foreign infrastructure and small quantity sales made 

containerization the most effective method for product delivery. Shipment of organic products is indicated 

as a reason for containerized shipping by 17 percent of the respondents. Factors offered as less common 

reasons for containerized shipping were just-in-time delivery, USDA program sale, and lower cost than 

air freight alternative. 

Shippers were also asked to indicate which resources they use to monitor the market and manage their 

businesses. This information may be useful in disseminating new information, garnering industry data, 

and understanding the current knowledge network. Over half the respondents indicate they utilize the 

internet for market and business information. Over 40 percent indicate they utilize consultants/brokers 

and printed media to monitor the market and manage their business. Public agencies, both state and 

federal, are identified as information sources for approximately one-third of the respondents. Less 

common sources of market intelligence identified by respondents include shipper organizations, 

international agencies, customers, other businesses, and trade organizations. 

3.3 Container Export Activity 

The previous section provided general information regarding grain and oilseed container exports 

including geographic scope, average shipper activity, and market volume trends. In addition, shippers 

were asked to provide more commodity specific information with regard to these shipments such as 

composition, packaging, premiums, and export region. Due to the limited number of responses, 

commodity level information should be used with caution. The data does, however, offer a rare 

opportunity to gain greater understanding of this segment of the grain and oilseed industry. 

Soybean exports dominate volumes among the containerized grain and oilseed export activity reported by 

shippers. The reported soybean exports account for 73 percent of total respondent grain and oilseed 

volume. Pulse crop exports are 18 percent of the volumes reported by survey respondents. Wheat volumes 

account for 5 percent of the total. The remaining 7 percent of the export volume is comprised of 

commodities including buckwheat, corn, popcorn, and sunflowers. Considering the information 

summaries generated from PIERS for 2002, soybeans may be overrepresented and corn underrepresented 

in the survey commodity composition but the scope of commodities and dominance of soybeans is 

reasonable. Soybeans, pulses, corn, and wheat account for 47, 18, 9, and 1 percent of the 2002 grain and 

oilseed exports, respectively, in a summary of PIERS information. 

Shippers were asked about the marketing channels used for distribution of their containerized product. 

Based on previous data analysis the port regions in the Pacific Northwest, along the Atlantic and in the 

California coastal region were identified as prominent gateways for grain and oilseed exports (Vachal and 

Reichert, 2000). Among U.S. port regions, the Pacific Northwest dominates grain and oilseed export as 

shippers attribute 66 percent of their annual shipments to this region. The prevalence of this region in the 

marketing of containerized grain and oilseed products is consistent with previous estimates based on 

PIERS data summaries. The Atlantic region is second in volume, based on survey responses, accounting 

for 18 percent of the total container movement. The California region including the ports of Long Beach 

and Los Angeles is attributed with 13 percent of the volume. Shippers also reportedly move containers 

through terminals through ports in New York, Florida, and Texas.
9

In addition to the export marketing of grain and oilseeds in containers, shippers were asked if they 

marketed via container within U.S. borders. Responses indicate this is more common with commodities 

included in the other category as 22 percent of these shippers indicated they did market via container to 

U.S. destinations. In the case of soybean shippers, 18 percent indicated they had shipped to U.S. 

customers via container. None of the pulse crop shippers indicated they delivered to customers in the 

United States via container. 

A number of alternatives exist for packaging products for the containerized move though port and on to 

the customer. Three common methods of packaging are bag, tote, and bulk. The bag product is typically 

packaged in 50 pound bag that can be easily moved by hand. The tote or mini-tote is a large bag, often 

moved on a pallet, usually weighing 1,000 pounds or more. Bulk packaging may also be achieved by 

transloading the bulk product directly into the container, which may or may not be lined with plastic. 

Bags are the most prevalent form of packaging for containerized grain and oilseed shipments, as shippers 

indicate this is the most common form of packaging across the soybean, pulse, wheat, and other export 

products. Bag and bulk are the most common forms of packaging for containerized soybean export, as 99 

and 90 percent of shippers report utilizing these packaging options, respectively. Approximately 60 

percent of the soybean shippers employ tote packaging alternatives. Shippers of pulse crops are more 

likely to use bags for shipping their product, as 75 percent of the respondents indicate they use this 

method. The bulk and tote alternatives are used exclusively, or in addition to the bag method, by 50 and 

12 percent of the shippers, respectively. The bag option is used by all the wheat respondents, in addition 

to some use of bulk and little utilization of the tote. The pattern is similar for other commodities as 81 

percent of shippers report they use the bag method, and 48 and 26 percent use the bulk and tote packaging 

options, respectively. The prevalence of bags in the container grain and oilseed shipments is expected as 

the ease of handle without mechanical assistance is often a necessary characteristic for products marketed 

via container. For example, these shipments may be food aid or shipped to a customer as a small-scale 

specialty commodity. 

Soybean

Pulses

Wheat

Other

Figure 3.2 Containerized Grain and Oilseed 
10

Shippers reportedly receive an average $5 premium per hundredweight for containerized grain and 

oilseed exports, compared to the local bulk market price. Soybean premiums ranged from $1 to $16.50 

per hundredweight. The average soybean premium is $4.60 per hundredweight or $2.75 per bushel. The 

premium represents an increase in producer revenue of 51 percent considering the average price received 

by farmers in 2002 of $5.40 (National Agricultural Marketing Service). The net effects to producer return 

are estimated to be increased by 28 percent considering the shipper reported $2.75 premium, less the 

additional marketing costs that are estimated to be $1.22 per bushel. The projected net return is based on 

an economic engineering estimate of the additional marketing costs that likely underestimates the 

additional marketing costs (Vachal and Reichert, 2000). In addition to dynamic market variables that 

impact these marketing costs, the model does not consider any additional opportunity cost, production or 

handling cost, or risk premium. 

Shippers report average premiums for pulse crops range from 50 cents to $3 per hundredweight. The 

average premium for this commodity class is $1.10 per hundredweight. Due to limited responses for 

premiums received for other commodities, the remaining premium data is grouped into the “Other 

Commodity” category. The average premium for commodities, including crops such as wheat, corn, 

popcorn, and sunflowers, is reported to be $9.30 per hundredweight with a wide range of premiums from 

$1 to $20 per hundredweight. 

3.4 Market Growth Factors 

Statistics indicate that containerized marketing of grain and oilseeds has been an established specialty 

segment of the U.S. agricultural industry. The shipper volume and industry trend information presented 

in previous sections suggests this segment may be poised for additional growth. Therefore, it is important 

to ascertain the relevance of an array of market factors that may lend to or diminish potential for this 

market growth. Shipper opinions regarding the relevance of factors provide important insight that may be 

used in assessing issues related to this industry. To attain these opinions, shippers were asked to rank the 

relevance of 14 factors to the future growth of the containerized agricultural product export trade on a 

scale of 1 to 5, with 1 indicating the factor is not important and 5 indicating the factor is very important 

(Table 3.1). 

Among the market factors, ocean shipping rates are identified as the most important factor for the success 

of containerized trade with a rating of 4.6. Shipper ratings of 4.2 and 4.0, respectively, indicate additional 

critical factors are the availability of containers and rail shipping rates for containers. Ocean liner routes 

and services, distance to container terminal, and foreign buyer information are also rated with above 

average importance, ranging from 3.6 to 3.9 on the scale. 
11

Table 3.1 Market Growth Factors

Factor Shipper Rating

Distance to Container Terminal 3.7 

Foreign Buyer Information 3.6 

State Truck Weight Limits 3.4 

Availability of Containers 4.2 

Farm Program 2.3 

Inspection/Phytosanitary Requirements 3.4 

Access to Market Information 3.4 

Ocean Liner Routes and Services 3.9 

Ocean Shipping Rates for Containers 4.6 

Rail Shipping Rates for Containers 4.1 

Barge Container Service Rates 2.7 

Container Logistics Information 3.3 

Financing 3.2 
12

4. CONCLUSION 

Since its globalization in the 1960s, containerization has moved from specialization to generalization in 

terms of product transport. Technology advancements and market innovations have significantly reduced 

cost and service barriers once prohibitive for lower-value commodity movements. The U.S. agricultural 

industry is a heavy user of containers, especially for transporting higher-value products such as fruits, 

vegetables, and processed foods. More recently, U.S. grain and oilseed shippers also have begun to 

utilize the flexibility of containerization to ship to customers worldwide. Traditionally, these lower-value 

bulk products move in train- and vessel-size shipments. 

The objective of this research was to create a profile of the U.S. grain and oilseed industry. The profile is 

based on survey responses from 47 shippers located across 19 states. The profile considers shipper 

characteristics, market practices, container export activity, and market growth factors. 

Containerized grain and oilseed shippers are generally experienced, having been in business an average of 

23 years and 80 percent in business for 10 years or more. The containerized marketing activity, however, 

is a newer addition to the business mix as over half have marketed via container for less than 10 years. 

Annual individual business TEU volumes increased from an average 169 in 2000 to 212 in 2002. 

Respondents reportedly marketed a total of 9,766 TEUs of grain and oilseeds via container in 2002. 

Shippers expect these volumes to increase 20 percent over the next two years. Soybeans dominate the 

commodity mix, accounting for 73 percent of the volume reported by shippers. A majority of the 

containerized grain and oilseed export volume, 76 percent, is originated by shippers located within 350 

miles of their primary container terminal. The Pacific Northwest dominates U.S. seaports considering 

shipper utilization of gateways in moving these products from the inland production points to ocean 

vessel for shipment to overseas customers. 

Dynamic market fundamentals influence the profitability of containerized grain and oilseed shipments as 

global container trade dictates rate levels and equipment. Shippers indicate an average premium of $5 per 

hundredweight for container shipments, relative to the local bulk market price. Business marketing 

practices and exogenous market factors affect the difference in net return to shippers or the bulk versus 

containerized grain sale. Ocean service contract negotiation is a critical factor in this profitability. Over 

half the respondent shippers negotiate contract terms with their ocean carriers. The drayage for shipments 

made under some contracts is handled by the ocean carrier for 13 percent of shippers. Most often, freight 

forwarders are hired to manage the drayage for container shipments. 

Shippers indicate ocean shipping rates are the most critical factor in the potential growth of their 

businesses. Other important factors include availability of containers and rail rates for shipping 

containers. Shipper responses also suggest that ocean liner routes and services, distance to container 

terminal, and foreign buyer information have greater than average significance in terms of factors 

important to the success of the containerized grain and oilseed market sector. These shipper insights into 

growth factor and the industry shipper profile presented in this research offer a unique opportunity to gain 

insight into a growing segment of the grain and oilseed industry. The information may be an asset in 

future planning, policy, research, and investment discussions. 
13

5. REFERENCES 

National Agricultural Statistics Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Statistics 

2003, Located at www.usda.gov/nass/pubs/agr03/acro03.htm. Accessed April 12, 2003. 

National Unaffiliated Shippers Association, Ocean Shipping Reform Act, Located at 

http://www.nusa.net/nusafmc.htm. Accessed May 2, 2003. 

Port Import Export Reporting Service (PIERS), Data Subscription Services, Journal of Commerce, New 

York, New York, 1999-2002. 

TEU (20-foot equivalent unit)--Commonly describes a 20-foot container. 

This estimate includes barley, cottonseed, corn, flaxseed, oats, rye, sorghum, soybeans, sunflowers and 

wheat. 

Vachal, Kimberly and Heidi Reichert. 2000. Identity Preserved Grain: Logistical Overview, UGPTI Staff 

Paper No. 143, North Dakota State University, Fargo. 

Vachal, Kimberly and Heidi Reichert. 2002. U.S. Containerized Grain and Oilseed Exports: Industry 

Profile Phase I, MPC Report No. 02-132. 
14

This survey is being conducted to better understand the information and

marketing needs of U.S. field crop container exporters. Please enlist resources we

currently have available for container shippers at

www.ams.usda.gov/tmd/tmdsea.htm. 

Return the enclosed Industry Alert card to receive notification about survey results. 

We appreciate your cooperation in our effort and look forward to working 

with you in the future.

INDIVIDUAL RESPONSES ARE

CONFIDENTIAL!

Data will be 

Aggregated by Region for

Survey Results

APPENDIX A

CONTAINERIZED EXPORTS OF FIELD CROPS

Survey of Shippers

Please Respond by 

December 20, 2002
15

Please Describe your Operation

Q1. Characteristics

1.1 Primary Business Address, State _____________ County ________________________

1.2 Number of years you have been in business: _____________ years

1.3 Number of years you have exported grain via container: _______________years

1.4 Location of your primary intermodal terminal. City: __________________________ State: _________

1.4.1 Average Miles from your business to this terminal: __________________ miles

1.5 Farm Business Structure (Please Circle): 

 Independent Partnership Corporation Other (Please Specify) _____________________

Q2. Volume of grain you marketed/expect to market via container:

2.1 2000: TEUs

2.2 2001: TEUs

2.3 2002: TEUs

2.4 Expected Exports for 2003: TEUs

2.5 Expected Exports for 2004: TEUs

Please Describe your Marketing Practices

Q3. Regions/Countries you have shipped field crop containers to (Please Circle):

Asia Africa India Mideast CIS Europe North America Other(Specify)_________________

Q4. Drayage (trucking) required to move the container between your facility and the container terminal is handled by (Please Circle):

(1) Yourself (2) Ocean Carrier (3) Freight Forwarder (4) Other ________________

Q5. Negotiations with ocean carriers for freight rates and service terms are negotiated by (Please Circle):

(1) Yourself (2) Freight Forwarder (3) Buyer (4) Marketing Consortium (4) Other __________________

Q6. Have your worked with a shippers association? Yes No
16

Q6. Composition and Characteristics of Field Crop Container Exports

COMMODITY

Soybean Pulses

Other (Please Specify)

________________

Other (Please Specify)

________________

6-1. Composition % % % %

6-2. Packaging (Please Circle all that

Apply) Bag / Tote / Bulk Bag / Tote / Bulk Bag / Tote / Bulk Bag / Tote / Bulk

6-3. Shipment is Part of USDA

Program Sale % % % %

6-4. Average Premium for

Container Shipment

Compared to Bulk Local

Market Price

 $ per Cwt $ per Cwt $ per Cwt $ per Cwt

6-5. Do you Market Any of this

Crop within the U.S. by

Container?

No / Yes No / Yes No / Yes No / Yes

Q7. Which Ocean Port Region do you Use for your Field Crop Container Exports?

Pacific Northwest Region Long Beach/LA Region Atlantic Port Region

Other (Please Specify)

________________

Share of Volume %%%%

Q8. Why are you shipping via container (Please Circle all the Apply)?

Organic Product Food Grade Product JIT Delivery USDA Program

Buyer Request Foreign Infrastructure Non-GMO Product Small Quantity Sales

Other ___________________________________________

Q9. Which resources do you use to monitor market information and manage your business (Please Circle all the Apply)?

Internet Magazines/Newspapers Shipper Organizations

State Agencies International Agencies Consultant/Broker

Federal Agencies Other (Please Specify) ___________________________

Q10. Contracts

10.1 Typical Duration for Contract with Foreign Buyer: ______________ months

10.2 On average, how many buyers do you contract with annually? _____________ buyers

10.3 Time between signing of sale contract and actual shipment? _______________

10.4 Is delivery point typically specified in sale contract? Yes / No
17

Q11. What factors are of greatest importance in the future growth of your field crop container business?

not 

important 

very 

important

11-1. Distance to Container Terminal 1 2 3 4 5

11-2. Foreign Buyer Information 1 2 3 4 5

11-3. State Truck Weight Limits 1 2 3 4 5

11-4. Availability of Containers 1 2 3 4 5

11-5. Farm Program 1 2 3 4 5

11-6. Inspection/Phytosanitary Requirements 1 2 3 4 5

11-7. Access to Market Information 1 2 3 4 5

11-8. Ocean Liner Routes and Services 1 2 3 4 5

11-9. Ocean Shipping Rates for Containers 1 2 3 4 5

11-10. Rail Shipping Rates for Containers 1 2 3 4 5

11-11. Barge Container Service Rates 1 2 3 4 5

11-12. Container Logistics Information 1 2 3 4 5

11-13. Financing 1 2 3 4 5

11-14. Other (please specify) 1 2 3 4 5

We welcome any additional comments regarding field crop container marketing:

THANK YOU!

For questions contact: Kimberly Vachal, kimberly.vachal@ndsu.nodak.edu • P:(701)224-5651 • North Dakota State University