Category: Specialty Topics

Authors: Jose Andres Solis and Chrystol Thomas

Rural land values in the U.S. sit at the intersection of agriculture, housing, energy, and long-term investment. Land values influence producers’ borrowing capacity and decision making while they influence households’ wealth and tax burdens, affecting the prosperity of rural communities. There was an increase in rural land and property values in the wake of the pandemic, due in part to high buyer demand. Remote workers were able to relocate from cities to rural areas as broadband access (high-speed internet) expanded and rural infrastructure improved in more remote regions (Smith, 2023), resulting in an emerging trend across the U.S. that further increased demand for rural land. Understanding the factors affecting rural land values help determine the resilience of farm operations and the affordability of rural living, both of which are important to the development of rural communities. This becomes even more pertinent given the recent shift in interest rates, along with the volatile nature of commodity prices, and growing competition for land from investors for various purposes such as renewable energy projects. 

Texas is known for its rural character, having the most farmland in the country and by far the largest amount in the southern region (U.S Census, 2022, see Figure 1). Despite the state having one of the lowest land values in the region, second only to Oklahoma (Figure 2), its land value increased by about 55% over the past 10 years (Smith et al., 2025). Average per-acre land prices increased from $1,951 in 2017 to $3,021 in 2022, mostly driven by an increased recreational use potential (Smith et al., 2025). The 2024 Texas Land Trends report found that rural land values were highly influenced by demand for lifestyle-oriented buyers and investors rather than traditional farm income from production (ASFMRA-TX, 2024). Rural land in Texas was valued at nearly $300 billion in 2021, representing about 10% of the total rural real estate value in the U.S. (Su et al., 2024). Although farm income and commodity prices have shown peaks during the past decade, they have since returned to more stable levels, placing a significant financial burden on both new buyers trying to enter the market and long-time landowners struggling to hold on to their property. According to the ASFMRA- TX (2024), the strongest increases in land value in rural Texas were observed in Central Texas (48%) and the Upper Gulf Coast Region (12%) given their proximity to intense growing urban centers like Austin and Houston, respectively. In contrast, Far West Texas showed the slowest growth in value. Gilliland et al. (2020 & 2010) alluded to the sparse population, lack of urban development, and limited agricultural infrastructure as factors influencing the low land values in this region. 

To examine the factors that influence land values, this article uses Washington County in Texas as an example. The county is in the Blackland Prairies region of southeast central Texas, an area influenced by its proximity to urban centers and its availability to those markets. Specifically, a 250-acre case study property was examined. The site features hilly topography, a mix of wooded and open areas, recreational infrastructure, and five building improvements, including a main house overlooking a small lake. To analyze the property’s market value and the factors influencing it, data from 136 comparable property sales in the county were used. A simple regression analysis was performed to identify significant factors that influenced land prices. The variables used in the analysis to determine the factors that influence property values in Washington County were minutes to Brenham (urban center), percentage of surface water, percentage of floodplain, percentage of wooded area, plot size, and market conditions.

The variables found to have a statistically significant impact were reduced drive time to Brenham (urban center), percentage of surface water, percentage of floodplain, and market conditions. The regression analysis showed that for every 5-minute increase in drive time to Brenham, land value decreased by 12%, while each 0.5% increase in surface water coverage added 5% to property value. Similarly, properties with more floodplain coverage saw a reduction in value by 4% for every 5% increase in floodplain, reflecting the risk for recreational buyers. Market conditions showed that land values are rising at about 1% per month, highlighting the constant rising demand. A characteristic that is important to note is that land size was deemed statistically insignificant, reinforcing the idea that amenities and accessibility influence more than acreage in recreational markets.

Washington County serves as an example of how non-agricultural factors are driving rural land valuation in Texas. Multiple factors influence land values in Texas that extend from traditional farm income and production capabilities. The statistical analysis done highlights that the tract location and accessibility are the factors that influence land value the most. As land near major cities often has a market rate significantly higher than those in remote areas. In Washington County, for example, public road frontage was found to be the most significant quality for impact on land prices, reflecting the importance of development potential and easy access. Soil quality and water availability also play major roles as fertile land and reliable water sources reduce production costs and enhance productivity (ASFMRA-TX, 2024). Other than traditional agricultural uses, recreational demand has become a powerful driver of land value, especially during the pandemic in 2020, when individuals sought for a rural homesites as comfortable retreats, prioritizing lifestyle and recreation over traditional farm income (Smith, 2023). Additionally, infrastructure and government incentives shape land value by determining how a tract of land can be used and improved. Research show that non-farm factors now play a crucial role as commodity prices or farm returns, highlighting the complex nature of Texas rural land valuation (Su et al., 2025). 

Understanding the key drivers of rural land value, especially in counties like Washington, has various implications for a wide range of buyers. Landowners and investors can use this information to make more informed decisions about when and where to buy, sell, or how to develop rural properties, especially as recreational demand continues to rise. Local governments and planners benefit by recognizing how access to land, water features, and proximity to urban areas influence land use trends and can proactively manage growth through development and zoning decisions. Moreover, developers can use these findings to balance the competing interests of development and land preservation, especially in high demand areas. The growing trend of recreational land and displacement from agricultural income also raises concerns for new farmers and policy makers.

Figure 1. Farm & Land: Operations & Acres by State, 2024

Figure 2. Cropland, Pastureland, and Farmland (including buildings) Values per Acre by State, 2024

---

References:

American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers, Texas Chapter (ASFMRA-TX). (2024). Texas rural land value trends 2024. ASFMRA Texas Chapter.

Gilliland, C. E., Greaves, S., & Su, T. (2020). Structural trends of regional Texas rural land markets. Texas Real Estate Research Center at Texas A&M University. Available at: https://trerc.tamu.edu/article/structural-trends-regional-texas-rural-land-markets-2279/ (Accessed: 11 July 2025).

Gilliland, C. E., Gunadekar, A., Wiehe, K., & Whitmore, S. (2010). Characteristics of Texas land markets — A regional analysis. Texas A&M University Real Estate Center. Available at: https://trerc.tamu.edu/wp-content/uploads/files/PDFs/Articles/1937.pdf (Accessed: 11 July 2025). 

Smith, R. (2023). Southwest land values up: COVID played a role. Farm Progress. Available at: https://www.farmprogress.com/farm-life/southwest-land-values-up-covid-played-a-role (Accessed: 11 July 2025).

Smith, L.A., Lopez, R.R., Lund, A.A., & Anderson, R.E. (2025). Status Update and Trends of Texas Working Lands 1997 – 2022. Texas A&M Natural Resources Institute, College Station, TX, USA. Available at: https://nri.tamu.edu/media/y04fu4b3/status-update-and-trends-2025-full-report.pdf (Accessed: 10 December 2025).

Su, T., Dharmasena, S., Leatham, D., & Gilliland, C. (2024). Texas rural land market integration: A causal analysis using machine learning applications. Machine Learning with Applications, 18, 100604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mlwa.2024.100604.

Su, T., Dharmasena, S., Leatham, D., & Gilliland, C. (2025). Modeling influence of agricultural and non-agricultural factors on Texas rural land market values. In Preprints.org. 

https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202503.1016.v1.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2022). Nation’s Urban and Rural Populations Shift Following 2020 Census. Available at: https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2022/urban-rural-populations.html (Accessed: 31 December 2025).

United States Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service (USDA-NASS) (2025). Available at: https://www.nass.usda.gov/Data_Visualization/Commodity/index.php (Accessed: 10 December 2025).

Solis, Jose Andres, and Chrystol Thomas. “Drivers of Change in Rural Land Values: The Case of Texas.“ Southern Ag Today 6(2.5). January 9, 2026. Permalink

Good Reasons to Cooperate

Southern Ag Today has recently published several articles on why producers should consider joining, starting, or becoming more involved with a cooperative in their state. An annual publication from the US Department of Agriculture’s Rural Development^[i] (USDA RD) offers solid financial reasons to do the same.  How does a return on investment (allocated equity in the case of a cooperative) of 11.3% to 45.2% sound? It appears that cooperatives offer a distinct advantage to farmers in their state.  

How Does the South Stack Up?

The readership might be interested in a little competition (or some light post-holiday reading) – how does the US Southern Region^[ii] stack up with the rest of the US?  Table 12 in the report cited above provides information on cooperatives represented in each state, which are illustrated with the heat map graphics below and ranked^[iii].

Cooperatives Doing Business in Each State

Texas (#2) pulls its weight, ranking behind Minnesota in the number of cooperatives doing business in the state.  Oklahoma (#11), Tennessee (12^th), Mississippi (16^th), and Alabama (17^Th) also make the top 20.  

Number of Cooperative Members in Each State

Kentucky comes in first place!  Virginia (#8), Texas (#9), Tennessee (#11), Arkansas (#18), Mississippi (#19), and Oklahoma (#20) combine forces to propel the Southern US into just over one-third of the top 20 placements. 

Marketing Cooperatives Headquartered in Each State

Marketing cooperatives generate their revenue from the sale of members’ products. Texas again takes the #1 spot, but only Virginia in the Southern Region makes the top 20 at #19. These results, however, may not reflect next-generation cooperatives and cooperatives organized as LLCs (i.e., peanut cooperatives in Georgia)^[iv].

Supply and Service Cooperatives Headquartered in Each State

Supply and service cooperatives provide farmer members with what their name suggests. Southern states claim nine of the top 20 spots, with Tennessee (#4), Alabama (#6), Mississippi (#9), Texas (tied for #9), Oklahoma (#12), Arkansas (#16), Kentucky (tied for #16), Virginia (tied for #16), and Louisiana (#20). 

And the Winner Is….

Honestly, anyone who is a member of a well-functioning cooperative! In terms of sheer numbers, the North Central Region is first, followed by the Southern Region in second.  However, the presence of more cooperatives, their members, and specific types of cooperatives in various regions of the US is largely influenced by the types of commodities grown and the number of different commodities that can be cultivated in each region.  Farm size and the density of farming operations in each location also play a role.  Finally, farmers’ willingness to collaborate with other farmers seems basic, but refers to the willingness of farmers from two or three generations in the past.  Many cooperatives have been around for a long time, with 78% of all cooperatives operating for more than 50 years^[1].

The “well-functioning” part of a cooperative is largely due to the engagement of its members. If your farm is part of a cooperative, strive to be engaged with it by attending meetings, voting in elections, serving as a board member, and encouraging the next generation to do the same.

If you are looking to start a cooperative or improve a cooperative’s performance, many land-grant universities have specialists who help cooperatives succeed by training and developing cooperative board members and staff. 

---

^[i] Service Report 87.  USDA Rural Development Rural-Business Cooperative Service.  November 2024 [Unpublished Report]. https://www.rd.usda.gov/publication-cooperatives/sr-87-agricultural-cooperative-statistics-2023

^[ii] The US Southern Region, as defined by the Southern Risk Management Education Center, comprises 13 states, which account for approximately 26% of the US states (and a larger proportion of the land mass). The other regions are also defined, based on the types of crops grown in each region. 

^[iii]  To keep things simple, this article just compares the number of states each region has in the Top 20, as the acres of farmland, number of farmers, and the volume of business through each cooperative in each region may vary significantly.  

^[iv] The report excludes cooperatives that deviate from the one-member, one-vote model, as well as those that handle more than 50% of their volume from non-members.  

---

Richards, Steve. “Agricultural Cooperatives in the United States: How Does the South Stack Up?” Southern Ag Today 6(1.5). January 2, 2026. Permalink

Contributors: Stephanie Brown, Jennifer Hagen, Josey Keener, and Natasha Parks

As 2025 comes to a close and 2026 awaits, there’s no better moment to level up your home kitchen food safety habits. Explore our top five expert tips to help you prepare every meal with greater confidence and peace of mind in the year ahead.

1. Wash Hands, Clean, and Sanitize: The holidays bring gatherings and plenty of food, whether from parties, potlucks, or gifts. Now’s the perfect time to wash your hands often and focus on food safety. Organize, clean, and sanitize your kitchen and food storage areas, so you’re ready for extra treats and leftovers.  

In the home, using a four-step method for cleaning and sanitizing is recommended. They are 1) pre-rinse; 2) clean with detergent; 3) rinse; and 4) apply a sanitizer (Stone et al., 2020). If you skip steps, like using a sanitizer on dirty surfaces, this wastes product and doesn’t keep you safe. This is because the dirt and food debris on a dirty surface can bind to the active ingredients in many sanitizers, thereby preventing the sanitizer from reaching any foodborne pathogens present on these surfaces. When prioritizing which surfaces need to be cleaned and sanitized, consider the following: 

• Keep your cell phone out of the kitchen and remember to clean and sanitize it regularly – phones carry a surprising number of microorganisms! 
  • Refrigerators, freezers, or any other cold storage areas. This includes shelving, drawers, and walls inside of the unit(s).
  • Surfaces in storage and preparation areas including countertops, sinks, and shelves.
  • Common touch points such as light switches, knobs for stoves, and handles on doors, cabinetry, and equipment (e.g., microwave, refrigerator, and dishwasher).
  • If using reusable bags as part of your shopping habits, don’t forget to clean these as well. General sanitation tips to consider: Not all sanitizers should be used on surfaces that touch foods (i.e., food contact surfaces). Reading a sanitizer’s EPA approved label will tell you if a product is approved for food contact uses. To learn more about sanitizer basics, we recommend reviewing Stone et al., 2020. While this article was written with the food industry in mind, many of these concepts and tips can be applied to home settings. 
• Separate Don’t Cross-Contaminate: Reducing opportunities for cross-contamination to occur begins with bringing ingredients and food into your home. Many food items are stored in the refrigerator, including ready-to-eat items (such as leftovers and most dairy products), raw produce, meats, and more. These items can cause cross-contamination issues if not stored separately, particularly if they can spill or otherwise comingle with different food types.

Another best practice is to store items that are thawing in a refrigerator in a secondary container to prevent dripping onto other foods (Ahn et al., 2021). For example, raw meats should be thawed in a clean bin or plate to prevent liquids from dripping onto ready-to-eat foods (e.g., lettuce intended for salad). Using a secondary container can also be a great way to separate items of different types if you cannot dedicate whole refrigerator shelves to similar food types. 

• Use the Right Tools for the Right Job: Having the right tool, utensil, or piece of equipment to support food handling and storage can help keep your food safer and may make tasks easier to accomplish. To best explain, let’s use a food thermometer as an example. From monitoring refrigerator and freezer temperatures to checking the internal temperatures of foods, having thermometers can help determine whether foods have maintained or reached a safe temperature. However, having a thermometer is only one piece of the puzzle. If the thermometer will not measure the intended temperature range, it is hard to use or clean, is breakable, hard to calibrate, or not made of food grade materials, then this thermometer is not the right tool for this job. 

Every so often, tools and equipment should be reviewed to see if they need to be replaced. Items that commonly need to be replaced because they are difficult to clean due to wear and tear include silverware, can openers, cutting boards, and cooking utensils. 

• Times and Temperatures Matter: Many foods require holding or storage at a specific temperature range for a given timeframe to maintain their safety (i.e., time/temperature controlled for safety (TCS) foods). Instead of giving the gift of foodborne illness this holiday season and beyond, consider these practical tips: 
  • Do not rely on visual clues alone for determining a food’s safety. Always store perishable foods and leftovers promptly, and cook foods to their recommended internal temperature, which should be measured using a food thermometer. The USDA’s safe minimum internal temperature chart can be found in Table 1(USDA, 2025b). The maximum recommended time that foods should be kept out of the temperature danger zone (40ºF – 140ºF) is two hours. If working in temperatures above 90ºF, this time frame shortens to one hour (USDA, 2020). 
  • Don’t forget about the temperature danger zone when it comes to traveling with or hosting events with perishable foods. Consider using insulated containers/coolers or food warmers to keep foods at a safe temperature. 
• If you can’t finish leftovers in three to four days (USDA, 2020), consider freezing them to keep them safe. Using labels or stickers on your food containers are great reminders for what the safe storage time should be. You can also repurpose leftovers into new meals like soup, salads, casseroles, and more! Planning ahead saves money, reduces food waste, and helps prevent illness.
  • Food delivery is more popular than ever. Whether it’s delivering homemade treats to friends or ordering meals and meal kits right to your door, temperature is an important consideration, especially if living in warmer climates. Where possible, consider using coolers or other insulated devices to help keep perishable foods at a safe temperature. 

• Food Date Labels and Waste: When was the last time you checked the back of your fridge, pantry, or cabinets for forgotten foods and spices? Items left or pushed to the back can spoil, leading to unnecessary waste. Spoiled foods tend to have an unpleasant smell, taste, or other sensory properties that indicate a food has changed. This can happen at any time during a food’s shelf life, regardless of the date-based label associated with the product. It is important to remember that the microorganisms responsible for food spoilage are not the same as those that make us sick (i.e., pathogens). However, if food is spoiled, it means conditions have allowed all types of bacteria, including harmful ones, to multiply. Therefore, for safety’s sake, we recommend throwing out any spoiled foods to help protect yourself and others from possible foodborne illness. 

Along with spoilage, date-based labeling has been commonly used when making decisions about discarding foods. A 2025 food label survey demonstrated that the percentage of consumers relying on date-based labeling for decision making is on the rise (43% versus 37% in 2016; Neff et al., 2025). However, relying solely on date-based labeling leads to extra food waste and money loss for consumers. The 2019 EPA estimates for wasted food from food retail, food service, and residential sources reached 66.2 million tons (EPA, 2023). Of this, 40% was attributed to home use (EPA, 2023). The only food requiring date-based labels in the U.S. is infant formula (USDA, 2025a). The “use-by” date for this product is the final date that a manufacturer can guarantee the nutritional value and quality of this food (21 CFR 107). While most other foods contain date labels, these terms are unregulated, not standardized across the industry, and are typically used by companies to refer to a food’squality attributes, not safety. 

 Table 1: Safe Minimum Internal Temperature Chart from USDA. 

Product	Minimum Internal Temperature and Rest Time
Beef, Pork, Veal and Lamb Steaks, Chops and Roasts	145 degrees F (62.8 degrees C) and allow to rest at least 3 minutes
Ground Meats	160 degrees F (71.1 degrees C)
Ground Poultry	165 degrees F (73.9 degrees C)
Ham, Fresh or Smoked (Uncooked)	145 degrees F (62.8 degrees C) and allow to rest at least 3 minutes
Fully Cooked Ahm (to Reheat)	Reheat cooked hams packaged in USDA- Inspected plants to 140 degrees F (60 degrees C) and all others to 165 degrees F (73.9 degrees C)
All Poultry (Breasts, Whole Bird, Legs, Thighs, Wings, ground Poultry, Giblets and Stuffing)	165 degrees F (73.9 degrees C)
Eggs	160 degrees F (71.1 degrees C)
Fish & Shellfish	145 degrees F (62.8 degrees C)
Leftovers	165 degrees F (73.9 degrees C)
Casseroles	165 degrees F (73.9 degrees C)

*Table is from USDA’s Safe Minimum Internal Temperature Chart webpage (USDA, 2025b). 

---

References:

Ahn, S., Lepper, J. A., and Schneider, K. (2021). Food safety tips for the holiday season. University of Florida Institute of Food and Agriculture Extension, FSHN14-13. Available at: https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/publication/FS260

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (2023). 2019 Wasted food report: Estimates of generation and management of wasted food in the United States in 2019. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-04/2019-wasted-food-report_508_opt_ec_4.23correction.pdf

Etaka, C. A., McEntire, E., and Strawn, L. K. (2024). Best practices for reusable grocery bags. Virginia Cooperative Extension Publications, FST-476NP. Available at: https://www.pubs.ext.vt.edu/FST/fst-476/fst-476.html.

Federal Communications Commission (FCC) (2020). How to sanitize your phone and other devices. Available at: https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/how-sanitize-your-phone-and-other-devices.

Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (2025). Questions and answers regarding food allergens, including the food allergen labeling requirements of the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (edition 5): Guidance for industry. Available at: https://www.fda.gov/media/117410/download.

Mafe, A. N., Edo, G. I., Makia, R. S., Joshua, O. A., Akpoghelie, P. O., Gaaz, T. S., Jikah, A. N., Yousif, E., Isoje, E. F., Igbuku, U. A., Ahmed, D. S., Essaghah, A. E. A., and Umar, H. (2024): A review on food spoilage mechanisms, foodborne diseases and commercial aspects of food preservation and processing. Food Chemistry Advances, 5: 100852.

Neff, R., Broad Leib, E., Khan, A., and Gunders, D. (2025). Consumer perceptions of food date labels: 2025 national survey. Available at: https://chlpi.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Consumer-perceptions-of-food-date-labels-2025-national-survey-policy-brief.pdf. 

Olsen, M., Campos, M., Lohning, A., Jones, P., Legget, J., Bannach-Brown, A., McKirdy, S., Alghafri, R., and Tajouri, L. (2020). Mobile phones represent a pathway for microbial transmission: A scoping review. Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease, 35:101704.  

Stone, D., Kovacevic, J., and Brown, S. (2020). Sanitizer basics for the food industry. Pacific Northwest Extension Publishing, PNW 752. Available at: https://extension.oregonstate.edu/catalog/pnw-752-sanitizer-basics-food-industry

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Food Safety and Inspection Service (2020). Leftovers and food safety. Available at: https://www.fsis.usda.gov/food-safety/safe-food-handling-and-preparation/food-safety-basics/leftovers-and-food-safety.

USDA, Food Safety and Inspection Service (2025a). Food product dating: https://www.fsis.usda.gov/food-safety/safe-food-handling-and-preparation/food-safety-basics/food-product-dating

USDA, Food Safety and Inspection Service (2025b). Safe minimum internal temperature chart. Available at: https://www.fsis.usda.gov/food-safety/safe-food-handling-and-preparation/food-safety-basics/safe-temperature-chart.

---

Brown, Stephanie, Jennifer Hagen, Josey Keener, and Natasha Parks. “Top Five Food Safety and Quality New Year’s Resolutions for 2026.” Southern Ag Today 5(52.5). December 26, 2025. Permalink

The State of Georgia, according to the USDA’s 2022 Census of Agriculture, accounted for 39,264 farms, with a market value of roughly $13 billion in animal and plant products across poultry, peanut, cotton, pecan, fruit, and vegetable sectors. It is well known that small-scale farms are largely family owned and contribute significantly to the U.S. agricultural landscape, being of higher concentration in the south compared to other regions. Specifically, over 60% of U.S. farms in the southern region are small-scale (gross cash farm income under $350,000), and contribute significantly to the total farmland and food production. The specialized nature of Southern U.S. farmers’ markets makes them uniquely positioned with ever-increasing resilience, despite their economic struggles to sustain value-added products (Schupp, 2016). By consumer intervention and farm-vendor complexities, Woods and Wolff (2023) articulated agricultural commodities, climate adaptation, diverse needs of technical assistance, and (market) pricing confront U.S. South farmers’ markets opportunities. Consider the global picture of agrifood waste, estimated at roughly 1.3 billion tons (Adedeji, 2022), consumers in the U.S. are estimated to contribute 30-40% of this waste. This reported level, nearly 103 million tons, is more than any other country in the world. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, almost 14% of the world’s food production is lost before it reaches the retail stage, from roots, fruits and vegetables to cereals and pulses (FAO, 2011). 

Figure 1 shows a global account of how major food production goes to waste. USDA’s Economic Research Service (ERS) estimated that16% total food waste across the U.S. occurs at the farm level. Such losses may be attributed to climatic conditions, improper logistics/transport, incorrect harvesting techniques/times, etc. (Buchholz, 2019). Moreover, agrifood waste levels of U.S. Southern states appear to be on the rise as a result of a range of farm- and non-farm-related challenges such as inefficient farm-to-plate systems and inadequate storage infrastructure. These issues have placed significant pressure on farmers’ markets and highlight the need for increased agrifood safety education. Strengthening hygiene, safety and quality practices in harvest and post- harvest handling practices can help alleviate this pressure and reduce waste across the supply chain. In line with farm quality management policies and procedures, all (farm) workers should understand why it is important for them to elevate their personal/self-hygiene levels, their continuous use of clean/sanitized (farm) facilities/tools, and their deliberate/intentional care/effort to ensure the lowest contamination levels.

            Farmers’ markets in the U.S. South can play a role in reducing the agrifood waste that largely emanates from contaminated, poorly handled, including damaged food produce that can occur at any stage of the supply chain. Emphasizing the four well-known and established food safety key areas, namely: cleaning, separation, cooking, and chilling can support reductions in food waste. Key areas include regular washing of hands/surfaces, separating raw and cooked/processed agrifood produce, cooking to a safe (internal) temperature, and prompt/rapid refrigeration. Regardless of farm type, all farm workers require food safety training to strengthen their best practices and prevent/reduce microbial proliferation of farm food produce. Enhanced delivery of agrifood safety education would improve overall consumer protection as well as the empowerment of diverse farmers’ markets (Okpala & Korzeniowska, 2023; Okpala, 2024). 

            It is well-known that extension education, among other useful services, has been crucial in helping farmers improve their productivity and output quality by providing them with evidence-based research information. In fact, extension education, available across the land-grant institutions in the southern states, is well positioned to provide agrifood safety training to many farmers’ markets across diverse communities. For the farmers’ markets to thrive, a continuous and persistent implementation of agrifood safety education is paramount Prioritizing agrifood safety education would increasingly equip farmers’ markets towards achieving greater implementation of good practices, for example, good agricultural practices (GAP), good hygiene practices (GHP), good storage practices (GSP), good transport practices (GTP), good manufacturing practices (GMP), and others (Okpala & Korzeniowska, 2023). 

Figure 1: A global account of waste by major food category (FAO, 2016).

References:

Adedeji, A.A. (2022). Agri-food waste reduction and utilization: A sustainability perspective. Journal of the ASABE, 65(2), 471-479.

Buchholz, K. (2019). 14 Percent of Food Goes to Waste. In Food Loss/Food Waste in the US. Statistica (Published, 16 October 2019). https://www.statista.com/chart/19672/global-shares-of-different-agricultural-products-thrown-away/ (Accessed 24 April 2025, 3.47 pm EST).

FAO (2011). Global food losses and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention. Rome, Italy: United Nations FAO. Retrieved from https://www.fao.org/3/mb060e/mb060e02.pdf

Okpala, C. O. R., & Korzeniowska, M. (2023). Understanding the relevance of quality management in agro-food product industry: From ethical considerations to assuring food hygiene quality safety standards and its associated processes. Food Reviews International, 39(4), 1879-1952.

Okpala, C.O.R. (2024). Food safety activities for Augusta-Richmond County gardening community. Poster presented at Garden Club event in honor of Late Revd. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., 15 January 2024.

Schupp, J.L. (2016). Just where does local food live? Assessing farmers’ markets in the United States. Agriculture and Human Values, 33(4), 827-841.

Woods T & Wolff B. (2023). Farmers Markets and the South. Southern Ag Today. August 25, 2023. https://southernagtoday.org/2023/08/25/farmers-markets-and-the-south/.

---

Okpala, Charles. “Reiterating Agrifood Safety Education to Further Reduce Southern U.S. Farm Markets’ Product Waste.” Southern Ag Today 5(48.5). November 28, 2025. Permalink

Why do some cooperatives flourish while others continually struggle? The factors of success are not entirely obvious when the weather is great, crops are bountiful, and prices are favorable, because all cooperatives can thrive in such conditions. However, as economic and competitive pressures mount, small difficulties in board behavior can lead to poor firm performance.

I suggest that the very best board of directors typically share five important practices. An excellent board will:

1. Represent both the members and the cooperative
2. Provide examples of personal and organizational integrity
3. Promote loyalty among board members and the members
4. Develop a culture of continual learning
5. Establish a vision and strategy to guide management

Your board’s adherence to these practices will help develop a quality of resilience that will see you through turbulent economic circumstances. 

1. Represent both the members and the cooperative

An exceptional cooperative board represents the interests of the members while simultaneously protecting the assets of the cooperative. 

Your cooperative was initially formed to fill an economic need of the members. Perhaps it was cost savings from economies of scale, the provision of needed market services, or to combat unfair market power. Regardless, your cooperative exists to meet the needs of the members. But it must first exist if it is to help them. Your cooperative is a business, and like any business its continued existence is based on its ability to extract economic value from its competitive advantages. In short, it must be profitable. Members need to be reminded at times that they are investors in a business, and not participants in a discount club. Investors receive a share of profits, but only when profits have been made. When a board chooses to redeem member investments without the use of current year profits, they are essentially deciding to liquidate a portion of cooperative equity. It is the responsibility of the board to represent the members’ interests as both customer and investor. The cooperative comes first in performance, and members come first in purpose.

2. Provide examples of personal and organizational integrity  

An exceptional cooperative board adheres to a code of ethics that promotes a diverse culture where all can be heard without fear of punishment or retribution. 

A cooperative is one-part business and one-part social group. Therefore, it is not surprising that each cooperative has a different culture or manifestation of its customs, attitudes and behaviors. At the most basic level, this culture reflects the needs and desires of the members, but it won’t flow through the company if the directors fail to define this for management and employees. In this light, the board can greatly influence the ethical behavior of employees by modeling integrity in the boardroom. Ethical behavior of board members includes standards of honesty, integrity, dependability, and confidentiality. Board conversations are not to be shared outside of the boardroom. A good rule of thumb is that when items from board meetings are shared with the public, it should be done collectively by the entire board or by the chairman speaking on behalf of the board. Additionally, a characteristic of a flourishing cooperative is diversity. The cooperative must recognize the value and importance of all its members regardless of gender, age, ethnicity, or size of operation. Differences in personalities and backgrounds provide new perspectives that will drive creativity and ultimately, better strategy. A board that is trying to grow membership among a certain type of producer, would be aided by having that group represented on the board. 

3. Promote loyalty among board members and the members

An exceptional cooperative board fosters loyalty to the cooperative through accountability to one another, transparency to the members, and their personal business transactions. 

Meetings of the board of directors should be focused on providing direction to management, setting policy, establishing strategy, and overseeing the proper and effective use of assets. Each meeting should add to the progress of ones that came before. A thoughtfully prepared agenda helps the board to focus their limited time on director responsibilities and avoid the temptation to spend time on managerial decisions. Meeting minutes and agendas help board members to be accountable to one another through follow up on assignments and effective use of their time. 

Loyalty thrives on trust. For a board to be viewed as trustworthy to its members, it must be candid, both among board members and (to the extent possible) with the public. An exceptional board treats boardroom discussions with strict adherence to confidentiality. It is possible to be both transparent (by sharing what you are doing) and confidential (by not sharing intimate details of discussions and decisions). Members will respect the honest answer “I can’t talk about that.” Sensitive issues that need to be shared with members or the public should be done by the board as a whole or by the chairperson speaking on behalf of the board. Finally, board members themselves need to be prime examples of loyalty by doing as much business as possible with the cooperative. 

4. Develop a culture of continual learning 

An exceptional cooperative board is continually learning about board duties, the operation of their business, and the trends impacting their industry. 

Profitability is found through sustained competitive advantage. Competitive advantage is found by individuals who are constantly improving their understanding of their business and the industry in which it operates.  The very bestcooperative boards make it a high priority to receive continuing education to stay current with business skills, strategies, and industry trends. A board can set itself apart from others by devoting time for training at each board meeting. Outside experts can offer a few minutes of thought-provoking discussion that may lead to breakthrough strategies. The review of internal documents like employee handbooks, bylaws, and corporate policies may lead to best practices that protect the cooperative from legal liabilities. Continual efforts focused on board education will demonstrate to members and legal authorities that the board is striving to fulfill its fiduciary duties. 

5. Establish a vision and strategy to guide management

An exceptional board of directors provides vision and strategy while letting the manager manage. 

Sometimes, the most difficult task for directors is to step aside and let management do their job. It is the duty of a director to establish the vision and mission of the firm, to determine strategy to achieve that mission, to set objectives and goals dictated by that strategy, to oversee the acquisition and use of assets, and to monitor the performance of the firm. 

To do this, the board hires a general manager or CEO and contracts professional services (like auditors and lawyers) related to the monitoring and administration of the firm. That is where the operational duties of the board stop. Managers have the responsibility to establish budgets, use the firm’s assets to achieve stated objectives, monitor day-to-day operations, set short-term goals, hire and fire employees, and establish levels of pay and bonuses. In other words, decisions on the operation of the cooperative or the use of its employees are the sole responsibility of the manager. If the board is making these decisions for the manager, they not only put the cooperative at risk by ignoring the hired expertise, but they also take time away from their fiduciary and strategic responsibilities. 

Directors, then, have the responsibility to establish strategy. An exceptional board of directors will discuss strategic issues in every board meeting and periodically dedicate themselves to more intense strategic planning. 

Representation, integrity, loyalty, education, and vision are the hallmarks of an excellent cooperative board. By adhering to these qualities and being true to the role of directors, a truly exceptional board will be poised to lead their cooperative to achieve sustained competitive advantages and new heights of profitability.

---

Park, John. “The 5 Practices of Boardroom Excellence.” Southern Ag Today 5(47.5). November 21, 2025. Permalink