Sunday 28 October 2012

Falling Demand of Free Range Eggs in the UK

Based on the article “Falling Demand for Free Range Eggs Easing” [ http://theranger.co.uk/News/Falling-demand-for-free-range-eggs-easing_21809.html ] dated 1st October 2012 which was published by the British Free Range Egg Producers Association, the demand for free range eggs in the United Kingdom have dropped while the sales of cage eggs have increased.  Peter Thornton, the Chief Executive of Europe’s largest egg business said that the share of free range accounted for 53 percent of all volume sales in retailers in 2011 had fallen below half the total market and 5 percent was lost per annum. On the other hand, the sales of cage eggs were growing at the rate of 20 percent in the major retailers.

The law of demand says that when other factors which influence the buying plans is kept constant, the higher the price of a good, the lower is the quantity demanded. This concept can be deduced from the substitution effect.  It is well known that the prices of free range eggs are higher than those of cage eggs due to the high feed cost. When the price of free range eggs rises, so do the opportunity cost. The availability of substitutes, such as the cage eggs which is much cheaper, will be more favourable to customers to economize on its use.

Customer’s income is another reason for the decrease in quantity demanded when price rises. Sir Terry Leahy, the former boss of Tesco perceived that people would seek out a value alternate when there is a recession. When the price of good rises relative to income, consumers were faced with a higher  price and they could not afford to buy it. Naturally, they will react by buying fewer free range eggs and choose to buy more value or standard products.

A change of customer’s income and the price of related goods result in a change of demand. In response to recession, the fall in income decreases the demand for free range eggs. The demand curve then shifts leftward, as shown by the shift arrow of the yellow curve.  


As the demand for free range decreases, there will be a surplus since quantity demanded is lower than the quantity supplied. When more customers are purchasing cage eggs, the quantity demanded exceeds the quantity supplied and therefore, there will be a current shortage on cage production.




To achieve market equilibrium, quantity demanded must be equal to the quantity supplied. Referring to the above graph, the demand curve with downward slopes and the supply curve with upward slopes will intersect at the equilibrium price. Price above the equilibrium will be a surplus and the price below equilibriums indicates a shortage.

Price adjustments are the way to move towards the equilibrium price. A shortage of cage eggs will lead to an increase of price. As the quantity demanded exceeds the quantity supplied, consumers could not force the producer to sell more cage eggs than initially planned. When the price rises up to its equilibrium point, the shortage eventually reduced because the quantity demanded decreases and the quantity supplied increases. When the price increased to a point where there is no longer a shortage, the forces moving the price stop operating and the price comes to rest at its equilibrium.

Alternately, a surplus of free range eggs forces the price down. As mentioned in the article, the free range eggs have been cascarded down into value egg. Producers plan on selling does not match with the consumers plan on purchasing. In that case, the producers could not force consumers to buy more than they planned and price cut will be the best way to fall back to its equilibrium. The price fall decreases the surplus because the quantity demanded increases while the quantity supplied decreases. When the price has fallen to the point where there is no longer a surplus, the forces moving the price stopped operating and the price comes to rest at its equilibrium. In the current situation, the free range eggs were displaced by more enriched cage production which comes on stream. The surplus of free range eggs will become more and more and this will be a matter of concern for the industry and they have to come up with a plan to control the size of the laying flocks and the production of free range eggs so as to meet the consumer’s demand.

In my opinion, the eggs market in the UK did not achieve an efficient outcome. A competitive market achieves allocative efficiency only when equilibrium occurs. At the intersection point, the marginal social benefit on the demand curve equals to the marginal social cost on the supply curve.However, this will not occur on the current situation. The current market which delivers an inefficient outcome is being regarded as a market failure. In fact, there are two market failures here, one for the overproduction of free range eggs and another one for the underproduction of cage eggs.

Considering the overproduction market, with the quantity of free range eggs that is produced per day, consumers are willing to pay the amount which is less than the cost to produce. This results in a waste of resources. When drawing a graph, the deadweight loss can be shown in the area between the demand and supply curve towards the right of the intersection point. It reduces the total surplus to less than its maximum. Hence, there will be a social loss due to the deadweight loss resulted from the inefficient production.

On the underproduction market, the quantity of cage eggs produced per day is too little. Consumers are willing to pay much more than the cost of production. By producing the small amount of cage eggs, the total surplus is smaller than its maximum possible level. The scale of inefficiency is measured by the deadweight loss, which is the decrease of total surplus resulted from an inefficient level of production. On the graph, the deadweight loss can be shown towards the left of the intersection point, an area covered between the supply and demand curves.

                                                                                                                                         by Patricia Lee


No comments:

Post a Comment