Farmland is one of the most important assets for agricultural producers, serving as both a source of income and a foundation for their livelihood. With continued strong demand for agricultural land, farmland values in the Southern U.S. have steadily increased over time. According to the USDA Economic Research Service, the compound annual growth rate of farmland values between 2018 and 2024 was around 5 percent.
However, in recent years, there has been growing discussion that demand for farmland isn’t coming solely from producers. From media reports and even casual conversations with neighbors, we often hear about billionaires purchasing large tracts of farmland or significant parcels being sold to developers. Yet despite these stories and the concerns they raise, there is little concrete information about how frequently non-producer buyers are participating in the farmland market. This leads us to an important question: How active are non-agricultural buyers in today’s agricultural land market?
Using transaction-level data from lending institutions in Mississippi covering the period from 2019 through the first half of 2023, we can begin to understand the different types of buyers in the agricultural land market. Buyers are categorized into four groups: (1) individuals and general partnerships (GPs), likely involved in agricultural production; (2) financial and real estate businesses; (3) non-individual/non-GP agricultural businesses; and (4) other industries. Other than the first group (individuals and GPs), the rest are limited partnerships, limited liability companies, and corporations, and they are grouped based on the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes.
Figure 1: Number of Agricultural Land Transactions by Buyer Type
Figure 1 shows the number of farmland transactions completed by four groups between 2019 and the first half of 2023: (1) individuals and general partnerships (GPs), (2) financial and real estate businesses, (3) non-individual/non-GP agricultural businesses, and (4) all other business entities.
What we find is that the majority of farmland transactions in Mississippi are predominantly carried out by individuals and GPs. Between 75% and 83% of all transactions during this period involved buyers from this group. The presence of financial and real estate businesses in the market has grown over time, even though their overall share still remains somewhat small. Their share of total farmland transactions ranges between 6.36% in 2019 and 10.42% in the first half of 2023—surpassing the share of non-individual/non-GP agricultural businesses, which ranged from 7% to 9% during the same period. The final group—comprised of other businesses such as those in construction, warehousing, and unrelated industries—accounted for approximately 4% to 6% of total transactions.
In summary, individuals and general partnerships (GPs) remain the most active participants in the farmland market in terms of transaction frequency. However, there is an increase in the number of non-individual/non-GP buyers, particularly financial and real estate developers. While this external demand may help support farmland values, it can also contribute to upward pressure on land prices—bringing both potential benefits and challenges for agricultural producers. Moreover, this shift in ownership patterns coincides with a long-term decline in U.S. farmland acreage, but identifying the actual relationship will require more rigorous examination. As the farmland market continues to evolve, understanding who is buying agricultural land—and why—becomes increasingly important. Continued monitoring of buyer trends can help inform policy discussions, land use planning, and long-term strategies.
In the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) 2025 publication Principles of Community Engagement, community engagement is defined as building “sustainable relationships through trust and collaboration, strengthening community well-being”. Wallerstein et al. (2015) emphasized that essential strategies for a wide variety of community and organizational settings can be developed through community engagement and organizing. The recent flash flooding in Central Texas over the July 4th holiday weekend is an example of this engagement with numerous nonprofit charitable organizations involved in search, rescue, cleanup, and support efforts. These organizations include Texas Search and Rescue (TEXSAR), Texas Division of Emergency Management (TDEM), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Community Foundation of the Texas Hill Country, the Salvation Army, the American Red Cross, Kerrville Pets Alive, and many others. This article explores the contributions of charitable nonprofit organizations to community development, showcasing selected models of engagement and their broader regional impact in the southern U.S.
Community engagement through charitable organizations is a cornerstone of sustainable economic and social development across the United States (Wallerstein et al. 2015; Balsano 2005). These organizations support jobs and consume goods and services, thereby investing directly and indirectly into the local economy and contributing to community economic development. Furthermore, their community involvement and presence encourage charitable giving. Giving USA (2025) reported an overall increase in charitable donations of 6.3% in 2024, although there have been fluctuations in donations over the past five years. Studies have found that individuals receive some level of personal satisfaction when they donate (Crumpler and Grossman 2008; Hughes 2006; Steinberg 1997). Figure 1 shows that revenue per capita and the share of nonprofit relative to private employment are more concentrated in the northern United States, with relatively lower levels in the southern states. This regional disparity highlights lower nonprofit revenue per capita and fewer paid staff or volunteers relative to the for-profit private sector in southern communities.
The Southern region’s unique challenges, including higher poverty rates, food insecurity, and more frequent natural disasters compared to other U.S. regions (Thomas and Liao 2024), underscore the critical role of non-profit organizations in community development. Non-profit organizations such as regional food banks, Lions Club International, and Rotary Club have emerged as crucial partners in addressing some of these challenges through targeted interventions and community mobilization. For instance, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) reported that 14% of households in the Southern U.S. faced food insecurity between 2021 and 2023, leading to a rise in demand for food assistance from regional food banks. Lions Club International’s southern chapters implemented over 2,500 community service projects in 2022, focusing on vision care, diabetes prevention, and youth development programs. These organizations leverage volunteer networks and community resources to address immediate needs while building long-term resilience through education, health services, and disaster preparedness initiatives.
A more localized nonprofit is the Texas A&M University’s The REACH Project, which exemplifies innovative approaches to community development through academic-community partnerships. This project has demonstrated remarkable success in supporting essential workers through comprehensive support services. Currently, it has assisted over 3,000 essential workers and their families, providing access to affordable housing solutions, healthcare services, and educational opportunities. Similar initiatives have emerged in Alabama, such as the Black Belt Community Foundation, the foundation awarded over $500,000 in 2024 through 130 grants to community and arts organizations across 12 counties. The initiative supports local efforts in community development and the arts, reflecting its commitment to empowering the Black Belt region. These programs demonstrate the effectiveness of collaborative approaches involving academic institutions, local communities, and non-profit organizations in fostering sustainable development.
The impact of charitable non-profits on communities extends beyond immediate service delivery to fundamental social and economic transformation. Research indicates that communities with higher levels of non-profit engagement demonstrate greater resilience during economic downturns and natural disasters (Roberts et al., 2021; Searing et al., 2023). According to Giving USA (2025), nonprofits that retained 10% more of their donors experienced up to a 200% increase in fundraising revenue during the 2023 economic downturn, demonstrating how sustained nonprofit engagement enhances financial resilience. As the southern region faces evolving challenges from climate-related disasters to economic disparities, charitable non-profits play an increasingly vital role in community development. Strengthening collaboration with these organizations represents a crucial investment in building more resilient and sustainable communities.
Figure 1: Nonprofit Revenue Per Capita and Private Nonprofit Employment Share by State in 2023
Source: Visualized by authors using National Council of Nonprofits, State Nonprofit Data and Report, and U.S. Census Data.
References
Balsano, A.B. 2005. Youth civic engagement in the United States: Understanding and addressing the impact of social impediments on positive youth and community development. Applied Development Science 9(4): 188-201.
Roberts, F., F. Archer, and C. Spencer. 2021. The potential role of nonprofit organizations in building community resilience to disasters in the context of Victoria, Australia. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102530.
Searing, E.A.M., K. Wiley, and S.L. Young. 2023. Resiliency tactics during financial crisis. In The Nonprofit Resiliency Framework, Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003387800-34.
Steinberg, R. 1997. Overall analysis of economic theories. Voluntas 8 (2): 179–204.
Wallerstein, N., M. Minkler, L., Carter-Edwards, M. Avila, and V. Sanchez. 2015. Improving health through community engagement, community organization, and community building. In K. Glanz, B.K. Rimer and K. Viswanath (Eds.), Health behavior: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 277-300). Wiley.
In a recent Southern Ag Today article, Muhammad et al. (2025) explored whether Brazil can compete with the U.S. in Japan’s premium beef market. They found Brazil has the volume but questioned the quality. This article digs deeper, showing how advances in genetics and feeding systems may close the gap.
Two key forces shape beef quality: genetics and nutrition. Historically, Brazil relied on grass-fed Nellore cattle (Bos indicus), which yield leaner, less marbled meat. However, change is underway.
Crossbreeding with British breeds such as Angus is increasing rapidly. Angus semen accounted for 49% of all beef semen sales in 2021 (USDA–FAS, 2021). In 2024, British breeds made up a third of sales, driven by demand for marbling and tenderness (ASBIA, 2024).
Meanwhile, Nellore genetics are also improving. Breeding programs have targeted carcass quality for over two decades. In 2024, more than 14.6 million beef cows, 22.3% of the national beef herd (Figure 1), were artificially inseminated (ASBIA, 2025). Over 420,000 purebred Zebu calves were registered that year, reflecting long-term investments in breeding (ABCZ, 2024).
Nutritional gains have kept pace with advancements in genetics. Brazil rapidly expanded its feedlot systems, especially in the central-west and southeast regions. These enable grain finishing, improving marbling and consistency, key traits for markets like Japan. In 2024, Brazil had over 8 million head in feedlots (Figure 2), representing a 25% increase in five years (DSM-Firmenich, 2024). In 2023, feedlot-finished cattle made up 21.3% of all beef slaughter, underscoring the growing role of confinement (CNA, 2024). Advances in mineral nutrition, feed conversion, and precision feeding have further improved carcass yield and quality.
Brazil is no longer just a volume player. Upgrades in genetics, nutrition, and feedlot systems are reshaping its beef industry. It’s increasingly meeting premium standards. The U.S. still leads, but Brazil is narrowing the gap on quality.
Figure 1: Number and Percentage of Beef-Breeding Cows Inseminated in Brazil 2014-2024
Source: ASBIA (2025)
Figure 2. Cattle on Feedlots in Brazil 2014-2024
Source: DSM-Firmenich, 2024
Referneces
ABCZ – Associação Brasileira dos Criadores de Zebu. (2024). Estatísticas do Registro Genealógico – RGN. https://www.abcz.org.br/produtos-e-servicos/area-tecnica/registro-genealogico/estatisticas
ASBIA – Associação Brasileira de Inseminação Artificial. (2024). Index ASBIA 2024 – Beef cattle semen sales by breed. https://asbia.org.br/index-asbia/
Farmers across the United States planted an estimated 1.9 million acres to peanuts in 2025, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Acreage report released on June 30th. If realized, this would mark a 100,000 acre increase over last year’s value and would be the largest peanut plantings since 1991 (Figure 1). This is also the third consecutive year of peanut acreage increases, up from just 1.45 million acres in 2022. Low competing row-crop prices — especially cotton prices being below 70 cents per lb. — is one factor that made peanuts a somewhat more-favorable alternative in 2025.
Figure 1: US Planted Peanut Acres by Year
Data Sources: USDA-NASS. Acreage & Crop Production Annual Summary reports.
The 2025 planted peanut area for all major peanut-growing states is equal to or greater than what it was in 2024, as shown in Figure 2. Georgia — the largest producing peanut state — had the biggest increase, adding 50,000 peanut acres to last year’s figure for a total of 900,000 acres. Alabama, North Carolina, and Texas added an additional 10,000 acres apiece. Georgia’s total would be its highest since 1991, Alabama’s its highest since 2015, and Texas’ its highest since 2017.
Figure 2: 2025 Planted Peanut Acres by State and Percent Change from 2024
Data source: USDA-NASS. Acreage. 2025.
What could this increased peanut acreage mean for production and markets? The USDA Oil Crops Outlookreleased on July 15th reports an estimated 1.85 million harvested acres and an average peanut yield of 4,000 lb. per acre.1 This would amount to a record-high production of 3.7 million tons, a 476,000 ton increase from the 2024 level. At this level of production and current disappearance projections, 2025/26 marketing year ending stocks are projected to be 1.129 million tons, a 34% increase from the prior year. This expected increase in peanut supply would likely lead to a further decline in peanut contract prices going into next year. Overall, the USDA-ERS projects peanut prices for the 2025/26 marketing year to average $500 per ton, which is in line with the runner contracts offered this spring, and would mark an $18-per-ton decrease from last year.
The record high retail beef price reported by the most recent Consumer Price Index (CPI) has prompted a lot of calls about why prices are record high and whether there is any relief in sight. While we often write about the great cattle prices for producers who are selling, there is a flip side, and that is consumers who are buying beef.
Reduced slaughter and beef production, especially in the second quarter of the year, cut supplies just as grilling season heated up seasonal beef demand. The combination led to a spike in wholesale prices and retail beef prices.
Is there a chance for consumers to see falling retail beef prices in the coming months? Normal seasonal production and demand would suggest prices falling from recent highs. Evidence from the wholesale beef market over the last couple of weeks indicates lower prices.
Starting with the cutout, the Choice boxed beef cutout has declined each week since it hit a record high weekly average value of $394 per cwt 4 weeks ago. Each of the seven primal cuts that make up the cutout has declined in price over this period.
Ribeye steaks exhibit the normal seasonal pattern that peaks early in grilling season, then declines after Memorial Day. Ribeyes hit their annual peak price in late Fall as holiday demand drives them higher. Following the pattern, wholesale beef ribeyes peaked in price at $14.18 per pound. They have since declined to $10.50 per pound, only slightly ahead of last year.
Loin strips usually hit their annual wholesale price peak leading up to July 4th. They hit $11.84 per pound in June and have since dropped to $9.68 per pound. The price remains higher than last year, but wholesale spot market prices are coming down.
Wholesale 90 and 50 percent lean boneless beef prices continued to increase into July. The 50 percent lean price hit an all-time record of $2.62 per pound. Lean boneless beef is particularly impacted by fed beef supplies, which have been cut due to declining slaughter and seasonally lower weights. Boneless beef prices tend to decline seasonally after mid-year as we get past the grilling season rush in demand.
Seasonal price patterns would suggest that there is a chance for a little bit of relief from record high beef prices. But, only if we compare to the peak price this summer. Wholesale beef prices are already declining.
There is a time lag from lower wholesale prices showing up at retail, but lower wholesale prices combined with normal seasonality of various cut prices should lead to the expectation of falling prices in the coming months. But, it’s not likely that prices will decline below year ago levels.
A Preview
USDA will release the July Cattle on Feed report on Friday. While market analysts expect lower placements, marketings, and cattle in feedyards than a year ago, the really interesting number will be the number of heifers on feed on July 1. The heifers on feed will provide some insight into heifer retention. Also, look for placements in Texas due to the ban on Mexican feeder cattle. The lack of spayed heifers coming from Mexico is important in evaluating the number of heifers on feed.
