System Dynamics Modelling and Simulation of the Malaysian Rice Value Chain: Effects of the Removal of Price Controls and an Import Monopoly on Rice Prices and Self‐sufficiency Levels in Malaysia

A system dynamics model is developed to describe the dynamic structure of and decision†making processes occurring along the Malaysian rice value chain; then, the impacts of removing price controls and an import monopoly on rice prices and self†sufficiency levels (SSLs) in Malaysia are examined. The simulation results show that removing price controls would lead to sharp increases in rice prices but that Malaysia could, in turn, achieve 100% self†sufficiency. Terminating the import monopoly would stabilize rice prices, but Malaysia cannot achieve self†sufficiency. There are two alternative policies that Malaysia could pursue to reduce the trade†off between rice prices and SSL. Although irrigation development would stabilize rice prices, it would place heavy financial burdens on Malaysia. Therefore, Malaysia should explore the feasibility of paddy importation strategies, which could not only increase rice outputs, stabilize prices and achieve 100% SSL but also create more business opportunities and jobs in Malaysia's rural areas. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  Yaman Barlas,et al.  Formal aspects of model validity and validation in system dynamics , 1996 .

[2]  Time series analysis of factors affecting the demand for local rice in Malaysia , 2015 .

[3]  D. Dawe How far down the path to free trade? The importance of rice price stabilization in developing Asia , 2001 .

[4]  Robert L. Eberlein,et al.  Reality check: A bridge between systems thinking and system dynamics , 1994 .

[5]  P. Samaratunga,et al.  Trade Liberalisation and its Impact on the Rice Sector of Sri Lanka , 2011 .

[6]  James M. Lyneis,et al.  System dynamics for business strategy: a phased approach , 1999 .

[7]  David F. Andersen,et al.  Building confidence in causal maps generated from purposive text data: mapping transcripts of the Federal Reserve , 2012 .

[8]  Jozef Konings,et al.  Trade Liberalization, Intermediate Inputs, and Productivity: Evidence from Indonesia , 2005, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[9]  Andrew Ford,et al.  Statistical screening of system dynamics models , 2005 .

[10]  John Martin Richardson,et al.  The Past is Prologue: Reflections on 40-Plus Years of System Dynamics Modeling Practice , 2013 .

[11]  P. Dorosh Trade Liberalization and National Food Security: Rice Trade between Bangladesh and India , 2001 .

[12]  A. Tawang,et al.  Effects of Trade Liberalization on Agriculture in Malaysia: Commodity Aspects , 1999 .

[13]  Stefan N. Groesser,et al.  Contributions to Model Validation: Hierarchy, Process, and Cessation , 2012 .

[14]  I. David Wheat,et al.  The feedback method of teaching macroeconomics: is it effective? , 2007 .

[15]  I. Martinez-Moyano Documentation for model transparency , 2012 .

[16]  John D. Sterman,et al.  All models are wrong: reflections on becoming a systems scientist† , 2002 .

[17]  Michael J. Radzicki,et al.  Dyadic processes, tempestuous relationships, and system dynamics , 1993 .

[18]  George P. Richardson,et al.  Best practices in system dynamics modeling , 2013 .

[19]  Rogelio Oliva,et al.  Model calibration as a testing strategy for system dynamics models , 2003, Eur. J. Oper. Res..