Chicken Feet, Big Money: How One “Waste Product” Became a Global Trade Story

 

Chicken Feet, Big Money: How One “Waste Product” Became a Global Trade Story

Chicken feet tell a striking story about how the same product can create wildly different levels of value in different markets. In the United States, they are largely treated as low‑value by‑products; in China, they are a sought‑after delicacy that has reshaped poultry‑export economics for Brazil, Russia, and the U.S.

---

High demand in China, low value in the U.S.

In China, chicken feet—often called “phoenix talons” (鳳爪)—are a popular snack and dim‑sum ingredient, prized for their gelatinous texture and flavor when braised, steamed, or pickled.​
In contrast, in the U.S., chicken feet are mostly sold only in niche ethnic or specialty markets and otherwise treated almost as waste, often sent to renderers for pennies per pound.

This mismatch creates a powerful arbitrage: a product that is cheap to dispose of in one country becomes a premium food item in another.

---

From by‑product to export engine

When the U.S. regained access to the Chinese poultry market in 2019, U.S. producers quickly realized that chicken feet were the real prize, not whole‑bird meat.
By 2024, chicken feet accounted for 73.8% of U.S. poultry exports to China by volume, turning what was once a disposal cost into a major revenue stream.

Exports are highly profitable because chicken feet fetch around $0.80–1.10 per pound in China, compared with roughly $0.05–0.10 per pound when sold to U.S. renderers.
In the first five months of 2021, the U.S. exported 105,000 metric tons of chicken feet worth $254 million, up from 31,000 metric tons worth $39 million in the same period of 2014—a more than sixfold jump in value.

---

Market leadership and shifting shares

By 2020, the U.S. had become the leading supplier of chicken feet to China, exporting over 201,000 metric tons and generating about $460 million in revenue, roughly 44.8% of the market.
However, by 2024, Brazil had overtaken the U.S. as China’s largest chicken‑feet supplier, capturing about 42% of China’s imports, while Russia rose to second place with 22% and the U.S. slipped to fourth with 10%.

Russia’s role has grown dramatically: its exports of chicken feet to China surged 377% between 2019 and 2024, reaching $311 million in value.
This reflects both China’s insatiable appetite for the product and the ability of other countries to step in when U.S. access is constrained by disease‑related bans or tariffs.

---

Why size and quality matter

Chinese buyers particularly favor larger chicken feet, which tend to come from the bigger, slower‑growing birds raised in the U.S. and some other export markets.
Industry sources note that international restaurants and processors prefer U.S. “jumbo” paws for their better mouthfeel and perceived quality, reinforcing the premium pricing.

At the same time, Brazil and Russia have expanded processing capacity and logistics to supply frozen paws, gaining share as China’s overall chicken‑feet imports rose toward $2.3 billion in 2023 and beyond.

---

A lesson in product‑value arbitrage

The chicken‑feet trade illustrates how a single product can occupy very different tiers of value across markets. In the U.S., it is a low‑value by‑product; in China, it is a higher‑value food item than regular chicken meat in many contexts.
For producers, this means that re‑positioning a “waste” product for the right market can turn marginal scraps into a core profit center.

As trade rules, tariffs, and disease‑related bans shift, the story of chicken feet will continue to show how geography, culture, and regulation can all reshape what a product is worth—and who ends up profiting most from it.

Giants at War: The Epic Rivalry and Fates of the VOC and EIC

Giants at War: The Epic Rivalry and Fates of the VOC and EIC

The 17th and 18th centuries witnessed an unprecedented era of global trade and imperial expansion, largely orchestrated by two titans of early capitalism: the Dutch East India Company (VOC) and the British East India Company (EIC). Born from the mercantile ambitions of their respective nations, these chartered companies were not merely commercial enterprises; they were quasi-states, wielding immense wealth, military power, and diplomatic authority across vast swathes of Asia. Their rivalry was intense, often bloody, and ultimately shaped the geopolitical landscape of the East, leading to the rise of one and the eventual triumph of the other.

Foundations of Power: Birth and Early Dominance

The VOC (Vereenigde Oostindische Compagnie), established in 1602, was the elder and initially more formidable of the two. Granted a 21-year monopoly on Dutch trade in Asia, it was endowed with sovereign powers: to wage war, conclude treaties, build forts, and administer justice. This unprecedented state-backed charter allowed the VOC to quickly consolidate Dutch mercantile efforts and become the world's first true multinational corporation. Its initial focus was the spice trade in the Indonesian archipelago, particularly nutmeg from the Banda Islands and cloves from the Moluccas, which commanded astronomical prices in Europe. The VOC ruthlessly established its dominance, displacing Portuguese traders and establishing its formidable headquarters in Batavia (Jakarta) in 1619. Its vast fleet, armed with powerful cannons, transported unimaginable wealth back to Amsterdam, fueling the Dutch Golden Age. At its peak, the VOC employed tens of thousands of people, including sailors, soldiers, and administrators, and operated hundreds of ships.

The British East India Company (EIC), founded in 1600, predated the Dutch East India Company (VOC), which was established in 1602. However, the VOC, by consolidating several smaller Dutch trading ventures, quickly became the more formidable and initially better-capitalized of the two

The EIC (British East India Company), founded slightly earlier in 1600, began as a comparatively smaller and less organized venture. Initially, it struggled to compete with the well-entrenched Portuguese and the rising Dutch might in the lucrative spice trade. The EIC's early efforts were often hampered by undercapitalization and a less robust government backing compared to the VOC. However, the EIC gradually shifted its focus from spices to Indian textiles (calico, chintz) and later tea from China, finding new avenues for profit. Its primary strongholds became Madras (Chennai), Bombay (Mumbai), and Calcutta (Kolkata). The EIC’s initial strategy was more about peaceful trade, but as competition intensified, it too began to develop its military capabilities.

Friction and Open Conflict (17th Century)

The competition between the VOC and EIC was inherently volatile. Both sought exclusive control over trade routes and production centers, leading to inevitable clashes.

• Early Skirmishes and the Amboyna Massacre (1600s-1623): The first two decades of the 17th century saw frequent small-scale naval engagements and diplomatic spats. The peak of this early conflict was the infamous Amboyna Massacre in 1623. Following Dutch accusations of a conspiracy, VOC forces in Amboyna (Ambon, Indonesia) tortured and executed ten English traders, along with Japanese and Portuguese merchants. This event severely strained Anglo-Dutch relations and effectively pushed the EIC out of the Indonesian spice trade, forcing them to pivot more decisively towards India.

  
  

• Anglo-Dutch Wars (1652-1674): While these were primarily state-level conflicts between the Dutch Republic and England, the rivalry between the VOC and EIC was a significant underlying cause. These wars (First, Second, and Third Anglo-Dutch Wars) were fought largely over maritime supremacy and trade dominance. The EIC often suffered disruption to its trade during these periods, but the overall outcome gradually weakened the Dutch Republic's global naval power relative to England's, indirectly benefiting the EIC in the long run.

  
  

By the late 17th century, the VOC had firmly established its spice monopoly in Southeast Asia, while the EIC, having been largely ejected from Indonesia, solidified its position in India, laying the groundwork for its future dominance.

The Great Shift: EIC's Ascendancy (18th Century)

The 18th century marked a profound reversal of fortunes. While the VOC began to face internal challenges and static trade patterns, the EIC capitalized on opportunities in India.

• The Carnatic Wars (1746-1763): These conflicts in Southern India were primarily proxy wars between the EIC (supporting various local rulers) and the French East India Company. The EIC's eventual victory under figures like Robert Clive decisively eliminated French influence in India, leaving the EIC as the paramount European power on the subcontinent.

  
  

• The Battle of Plassey (1757) and Buxar (1764): These pivotal EIC victories against the Nawab of Bengal and the Mughal Emperor respectively effectively granted the EIC vast territorial control and revenue rights over Bengal, the richest province in India. This transformed the EIC from a trading company into a territorial power, with immense financial and military resources at its disposal. The wealth from Bengal funded the EIC's further expansion and maintenance of its large private army.

• 
  

  VOC's Stagnation and Decline: While the EIC was aggressively expanding its territorial control and revenue base, the VOC remained largely focused on its established spice monopolies. This left it vulnerable to changing consumer tastes (Europe's demand for Indian textiles and Chinese tea outstripped that for spices) and increasing administrative costs. Corruption within the VOC's vast bureaucracy became rampant, draining its profits. Its rigid structure struggled to adapt to the dynamic global economy.

  
  

The Final Chapters: Fall of the Giants

The late 18th century saw the definitive decline of the VOC and the transformation of the EIC into a colonial administrator.

• The Fourth Anglo-Dutch War (1780-1784): This war was a disaster for the already struggling VOC.The British Navy severely disrupted Dutch trade routes, capturing many VOC ships and territories.This conflict exposed the VOC's military weakness and further crippled its finances.

  
  

• VOC Dissolution (1799): Deeply in debt and unable to cope with rising competition, corruption, and the consequences of war, the VOC was formally dissolved by the Batavian Republic (the French-backed Dutch state). Its vast colonial possessions in the East Indies (modern-day Indonesia) were nationalized and became a direct colony of the Dutch state.

  
  

• EIC's Transformation and Dissolution (19th Century): The EIC continued to expand its control over India, effectively becoming the de facto ruler of vast territories. However, its immense power and controversial policies led to increasing scrutiny and regulation by the British government (e.g., Pitt's India Act of 1784, Charter Acts). The Indian Rebellion of 1857 served as the final catalyst. In 1858, the British Crown formally took over direct rule of India from the EIC, marking the end of the Company's political and military power. Its commercial operations had largely ceased years prior.

  
  

Legacy and Impact

The VOC and EIC were unprecedented experiments in corporate power, leaving indelible marks on global history:

• Global Trade Networks: They pioneered and perfected the concept of global supply chains, connecting distant continents and fundamentally altering patterns of production and consumption.

  
  

• Colonialism and Exploitation: Both companies were instrumental in establishing European colonial empires, leading to centuries of exploitation of resources, suppression of local populations, and the imposition of foreign rule.

  
  

• Modern Capitalism: Their corporate structures, joint-stock models, and methods of financing laid the groundwork for modern multinational corporations and financial markets.

  
  

• Cultural Exchange (and Conflict): They facilitated the exchange of goods, ideas, and people, but also brought immense conflict and social upheaval to the regions they operated in.

  
  

The story of the VOC and EIC is a compelling narrative of ambition, innovation, brutal competition, and the profound, often tragic, consequences of unbridled corporate power.