The Report of the Reorganisation Commission for Eggs, published in June 1968, was a condemnation of the British Egg Marketing Scheme which had at that time operated for ten years. The Commission criticised not only the detailed operations of the Board but also questioned the validity of the Board's major activities. Its condemnation contained the charges: firstly, that those who set up and operated the Scheme had been misguided and had worked in a way that was contrary to the well‐being of the egg industry and, secondly, that there is little value in the producer marketing board type of organisation. Both of these charges are serious and neither of them has been substantiated. This paper is devoted to showing that the major charges of the Commission were not supported by fact: the market support operations of the Board did not cause over‐production: market support operations improved price stability: the Board's marketing costs were not excessive; seen in the correct historical perspective, the Board from 1957 made a positive and helpful contribution to the development of egg marketing.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Guter et al. (1971) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: