Search results

Examines UK milk pricing since market deregulation in November 1994. Finds a wide range of milk price contracts on offer, with many processing companies paying prices above those paid by the voluntary farmer co‐operatives. Looks at the factors influencing dairy farmers’ initial choice of milk supply contract in the months preceding deregulation of the UK dairy sector in November 1994. Finds around 70 per cent of farmers surveyed, slightly above the percentage for all milk producers, signed to supply the voluntary farmers co‐operative, Milk Marque. Then surveys farmers to identify those who have switched supply contract during the year, finding little evidence of movement. Attempts to understand the apparent differences between farmers’ expectations in their initial contract choice and the market realities they have experienced over that period.

When the UK's Milk Marketing Boards (MMB) were disbanded in 1994 the formal link between the farm gate milk price with the milk's end‐use was broken. The purpose of this paper is to examine whether milk prices fell to their “marginal value in the least remunerative use” or whether “the market had put in place some other mechanism for raising the price upwards”.

An on‐line survey of UK milk producers, open to all, conducted in the summer of 2008, explored farmers' knowledge of their milk contract, the use of their milk, and the reasons for choosing their current milk buyer.

A liquid milk price premium (of 1.06ppl.) was earned by farmers who: sold on liquid milk contracts to processors, rather than to one of the three large farmer‐owned co‐operatives; and who recently switched milk buyer. Switching incurred high transaction costs, additional uncertainty, and went against commitments to the co‐operative ideal.

Publication of differences between a buyer's milk price and a benchmark related to how the milk is processed, (a D‐score), cumulative difference values (D_C), 12 and 24 monthly moving average difference measures (D_MA12 and D_MA24 respectively) alongside milk buyers' milk price would improved supply chain transparency, and lower farmers' switching costs. It would also help farmers to treat their milk's final markets, rather than their milk buyer, as their customers.

The paper puts forward practical suggestions that have never been discussed by the UK supply chain, even though they would have direct and indirect benefits to the actors involved.

In 1994, after 61 years, the UK’s Milk Marketing Boards were disbanded. One consequence, an increase in the variation of milk price paid to producers, is analysed here. Initially most milk producers joined the farmer‐owned co‐operative Milk Marque, accepting lower milk prices (estimated here at about 1.5 ppl in the 1997 milk quota year). A second analysis shows that these farmers accepted this lower milk price because of Milk Marque’s perceived financial security, and to support the principle of co‐operative marketing which they believed would protect milk prices in the long run. Milk Marque was dismantled in 2000 principally because of its planned enlargement of vertically integrated processing capacity. This has left dairy farmers at another crossroads; their choices now will shape the development of the marketing of milk in England and Wales for the foreseeable future. These options are discussed.

Marketing boards are an integral part of the farm economy in Canada. Their purposes have been debated for decades but seldom from a marketing perspective. Such an approach makes for an interesting way to study them. The purpose of this paper is to assess the pros and cons of marketing boards, suggesting how they can be made more responsive to market forces.

The paper positions the need for Canada to bring agricultural market reforms. The wave toward freer access to world markets makes the study of supply management that more interesting and relevant in the twenty‐first century. A brief history of marketing boards is presented, followed by a discussion of their economic, social and constitutional impacts on Canadian society. Dairy supply management issues are discussed because they serve as the basis for comparative analysis, given that dairy trade liberation has been the most successful. The impact of marketing boards on consumers is well documented.

The research points out that marketing boards lack managerial savvy to make them more efficient and responsive to market changes. Logistical and supply chain management approaches seem to be lacking. A failure to respond to markets has resulted in lost market opportunities, both domestically and abroad. The quota values, the legal and constitutional powers of Canadian marketing boards and the interprovincial trade barriers, among other issues, have stifled entrepreneurship and innovation, all with rising prices to consumers. Trade liberation will not be easy to implement even if it is urgently needed.

Some of the suggested market reforms presented in the paper are bound to have repercussions not only on farmers and their current ways of doing business but on Canadian society as well.

Few studies on marketing boards have been done from a marketing perspective rather than an agricultural economic one. It is the most current review of Canadian marketing boards. Marketing studies are needed to know more about how such boards are managed and function. They need to be more accountable. The recommended managerial studies on boards make the paper unique. While trade liberation is highly recommended for milk and dairy boards to meet world pressure, the paper does not call for their elimination.

The UK dairy industry is seriously under threat from imports and already contributes significantly to the country′s food trade deficit. “Food from Britain” blames this shortfall on the restrictions made on supply by milk quota. Suggests that the pricing structure for milk and the monopoly of the Milk Marketing Board are also significant contributory factors. “Food from Britain” champions, among others, increased exports of British cheeses and premium butter products for the home market, to help to redress the balance. Promar International researchers feel that processors would be better advised to concentrate on other types of added‐value dairy products for home and abroad. Discusses the proposals for change at the MMB, countered by a suggestion that only a system of regional competitive co‐operatives would ensure a genuinely free market for the purchase and sale of milk. Without dramatic changes in the structure of supply, allocation systems and pricing of milk it is likely that UK companies will continue to be overrun by imports, while finding it increasingly difficult to penetrate the European market.

The recent background to the UK market for organic milk is reviewed to establish the background to the Organic Dairy Production: A Sustainable Future for Organic Dairying conference held in March 2002. The presentations given at that conference are critically reviewed. Several of arguably the most important determinants of the sustainable future of organic dairying did not find their full expression at that conference. Issues largely or wholly excluded include: a priori evidence for expecting a higher level of co‐operation among organic than conventional farmers; the distinction between “competitive pricing” and “sustainable pricing”; import penetration and substitution, and post‐conversion subsidies; utilising innovative information technologies to “tell the organic story”; policing organic standards and traceability; and the ownership of the “organic label” and the number of organic standard bodies. The importance of these issues is shown by reference to the current market situation for organic milk in the UK. There is a need for considerable developments in the marketing of organic milk. More distance must be placed between associations that campaign for market growth and an organisation that will need to be appointed to take responsibility for providing reliable and impartial market‐based information.

Develops a method for estimating the monthly milk price schedule needed to counter the effects of seasonality, which is an enduring feature of milk production in the UK. The issue of seasonality has been mostly ignored in studies estimating milk supply functions. In this paper milk supply functions which explicitly take account of seasonality are estimated for Northern Ireland and Scotland. Pre‐testing of monthly milk price and milk supply time‐series, using an extended HEGY test and an ADF test, indicated the presence of deterministic seasonality. Empirical milk supply models incorporating seasonal dummy variables to account for deterministic seasonality were estimated in the two regions of study. The results of these models were used to calculate the monthly producer milk price schedule required to encourage dairy farmers to produce an even monthly milk supply pattern. These calculations indicated that, in the long run, a peak‐to‐trough seasonal price differential of around 8 pence per litre would be required to produce an even pattern of milk supply in Scotland, and 11 pence per litre would be required in Northern Ireland.

Since de‐regulation of the UK dairy market in November 1995, the UK dairy industry has lurched from one crisis to another, as milk prices initially rose to levels that were unsustainable for all but the largest processors and then fell to levels at which even the largest and most efficient dairy farmers are struggling to survive. Considerable emphasis has been placed in recent years on cutting costs in the dairy supply chain, yet little attention has been given to the scope for adding value, particularly for the benefit of dairy farmers. Against this background, the Milk Development Council commissioned a research project, from which this paper is drawn, to explore the scope for adding value to liquid milk. The results of the comprehensive consumer research undertaken provide clear evidence that opportunities exist for differentiating the liquid milk market. The research also underlines the strategic importance of consumer research in an increasingly competitive market environment.

The connotations, associations, custom and usages of a name often give to it an importance that far outweighs its etymological significance. Even with personal surnames or the name of a business. A man may use his own name but not if by so doing it inflicts injury on the interests and business of another person of the same name. After a long period of indecision, it is now generally accepted that in “passing off”, there is no difference between the use of a man's own name and any other descriptive word. The Courts will only intervene, however, when a personal name has become so much identified with a well‐known business as to be necessarily deceptive when used without qualification by anyone else in the same trade; i.e., only in rare cases. In the early years, the genesis of goods and trade protection, fraud was a necessary ingredient of “passing off”, an intent to deceive, but with the merging off Equity with the Common Law, the equitable rule that interference with “property” did not require fraudulent intent was practised in the Courts. First applying to trade marks, it was extended to trade names, business signs and symbols and business generally. Now it is unnecessary to prove any intent to deceive, merely that deception was probable, or that the plaintiff had suffered actual damage. The equitable principle was not established without a struggle, however, and the case of “Singer” Sewing Machines (1877) unified the two streams of law but not before it reached the House of Lords. On the way up, judical opinions differed; in the Court of Appeal, fraud was considered necessary—the defendant had removed any conception of fraud by expressingly declaring in advertisements that his “Singer” machines were manufactured by himself—so the Court found for him, but the House of Lords considered the name “Singer” was in itself a trade mark and there was no more need to prove fraud in the case of a trade name than a trade mark; Hence, the birth of the doctrine that fraud need not be proved, but their Lordships showed some hesitation in accepting property rights for trade names. If the name used is merely descriptive of goods, there can be no cause for action, but if it connotes goods manufactured by one firm or prepared from a formula or compsitional requirements prescribed by and invented by a firm or is the produce of a region, then others have no right to use it. It is a question of fact whether the name is the one or other. The burden of proof that a name or term in common use has become associated with an individual product is a heavy one; much heavier in proving an infringement of a trade mark.

These are the days of falling standards and sagging morale, nowhere more apparent than in the one‐time efficient public service. The division between management and workers in the field in the large public enterprises has grown wider and wider and we tend to blame the lower strata of the structure for most of the ills which beset us, mainly because its failures are more obvious; here, the falling standards of work and care speak for themselves. The massive reorganization of the National Health Service and local authorities has made evident, especially in the first, that the upper strata of the colossi which dominate our everyday lives have their ills too. Local authorities have been told “The party is over!” and the National Health Service has been told of the urgent need for the strictest economy in administration; that the taking over of personal health services from local authorities was wrongly attributed to “managerial growth” instead of a mere “transfer of functions”, but, nonetheless, new authorities were created, each with fast‐growing administrative organs operating services—doctors, nurses and patients—which had remained unchanged. Very large local authorities, with many functions lost to others, one would have expected to have resulted in economy of administration, has all‐too‐often been the opposite. Hardly surprising that those who pay for it all, distinct from those who receive of its largesse, are being stirred to rebellion, when they have been overtaxed, ill‐used and what is more important, ignored for so long.