Category: Specialty Topics

  • Agricultural Land Conversion a Concern for Cooperatives

    Agricultural Land Conversion a Concern for Cooperatives

    Recently, a great deal of concern has been expressed about challenges resulting from the conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural use. On the whole, the challenges from a loss of farmland might seem benign given increases in productivity, but on a local level these changes can be devastating to agribusinesses whose volume is tied to crop acreage. Nationally, approximately 4% of working land (including land used for crops, grazing, timber, and wildlife management) has been lost to non-agricultural use over the last twenty years. However, the problem is stronger in Texas and the south and along coastal areas. 

    Mainly the problem stems from increased land values, which provide greater incentives to sell or subdivide agricultural land. This might be especially problematic when we consider that the demographics of the farm population is skewed toward an older generation looking to retire or provide an inheritance. Land values continue to increase with trends toward urbanization fueled by population growth. The Texas population has increased 42% since 2000, compared to 18% growth for the entire United States in the same time.

    Data from the Texas A&M Natural Resources Institute shows that the losses in working land are primarily in crop land and grazing land. Anecdotally, cooperative managers in coastal Texas report that much of the land lost from agricultural production was good productive farmland. Reportedly, much of the decision to sell land has been from landowners, not farmers. 

    Cooperatives being impacted by these trends have basically four strategic alternatives:

    1. Restructure or downsize
    2. Exert greater control over land use
    3. Gain economies of scale through consolidation
    4. Expand into new markets

    A successful strategic response may incorporate one or all these alternatives. They each have their merits. Restructuring or downsizing recognizes that the cooperative may have assets that are no longer providing an adequate return. However, this strategy on its own seems to admit defeat. Some cooperatives in the citrus industry exert greater control over the land use by offering grove management services, thus providing landowners the motivation and expertise needed to keep land in production. Mergers and acquisitions are likely when there are economies of scale to be gained. However, for mergers to be a successful strategy, cooperatives must engage in these discussions while there is still value in both organizations. The cooperative that waits until there are no other options will not be an attractive partner for a merger. Finally, a cooperative could reinvent itself to meet the changing demands of members and the needs of new customers. This will require an evaluation of the mission of the cooperative and its value proposition. This is perhaps the most difficult of the strategic options, but also the choice with the greatest potential benefit. Changes in land use may come with new market opportunities. For example, some working land has been converted from crop land and grazing land to wildlife management, including hunting leases. These landowners will likely have some needs similar to farmers. The land is still there. Its use has changed. The successful cooperatives will be those that can remain relevant to the business opportunities around them. 

    SOURCE: Texas A&M Natural Resources Institute. 2020. Texas Land Trends: A database of compiled and analyzed values for working lands in Texas. College Station, TX. USA. URL: http://txlandtrends.org

    Park, John. “Agricultural Land Conversion a Concern for Cooperatives.” Southern Ag Today 1(50.5). December 10, 2021. Permalink

  • Southern States Address Solar Facility Decommission

    Southern States Address Solar Facility Decommission

    As Southern states pass their first decade of solar photovoltaic (PV) development, state policy-makers can view a horizon when many tons of solar PV equipment will require removal and disposal. Solar PV panels wear down under weather exposure, and at about twenty-four years cease useful and economic efficiency in generating electricity, and must be removed. Most solar PV facilities are developed by private companies upon leases with private landowners, which generally require the PV facility owner to remove equipment and restore land. However, such leases rarely address the specific costs of decommission, nor guarantee cash will be available to pay the costs, potentially exposing taxpayers and ratepayers to the financial burden of decommission. Land restoration has been a concern of rural communities and farm producers who have lost access to productive farmland devoted to solar PV development. 

    Though disposal of solar PV equipment is regulated under the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) (42 U.S.C. § 6901 et seq), decommission requirements are left to state authority. VirginiaLouisianaNorth Carolina and Texas have enacted solar “end of life” (EOL) disposal legislation, and South Carolina recently allocated state budget funds to regulatory development. In other states without regulation, counties may still require decommission plans as a condition for rezoning for a solar PV facility. (Such a model ordinance has been drafted in Georgia.) Indeed Virginia’s statute places upon its counties a developer requirement of financial assurance in exercising zoning approval authority. 

    Under North Carolina’s regulatory mandate, the NC Department of Environmental Quality recently completed an in-depth stakeholder study exploring costs of decommission and site restoration, future recycling markets to offset such costs, the timing of waste volume (for example, see figure 1), and waste management capacity and hazardous waste determination. The report provides a detailed window into decommission issues, which may serve as a model for other Southern regulators. Click here for more on the North Carolina Report.

    Figure 1. Timing of Solar PV Waste Volume in North Carolina (courtesy NC Department of Environmental Quality)


    Branan, Robert Andrew. “Southern States Address Solar Facility Decommission.” Southern Ag Today 1(49.5). December 3, 2021. Permalink

  • What does “Shop Small” mean for your Small Town?

    What does “Shop Small” mean for your Small Town?

    Next week is Thanksgiving, and then the holiday season begins. “You get what you get and don’t throw a fit” may be the national holiday motto this year. National shipping companies have been warning of slow holiday shipping since September. You may be shopping for what you can find in stores near you. Fortunately, local shops have lots to offer. Plus, when you shop locally, your community gains not just the sales tax from your purchase, but also jobs and income, property tax, and vibrancy. If you’re avoiding crowds, many small businesses have website and are still offering curbside pickup.

    The Small Business Administration (SBA) has co-sponsored Small Business Saturday (with American Express) since 2010. The SBA reported that last year, US consumers spent $19.8 billion at independent retailers and restaurants on Small Business Saturday. Still, a 2019 SBA study showed that 70% of U.S. consumers were unaware of the event. Now you know! 

    Among Small Business Saturday shoppers in the 2019 survey, 97% agreed that small businesses are essential to their communities. The Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council notes 98% of businesses have fewer than 20 employees (96% have fewer than 10).


    Dudensing, Rebekka. “What does “Shop Small” mean for your Small Town?Southern Ag Today 1(47.5). November 19, 2021. Permalink

  • Growing Value of U.S. Organic Specialty Crop Sales

    Growing Value of U.S. Organic Specialty Crop Sales

    Sales of organic specialty crops grown in the U.S. rose by about 124 percent from 2014 to 2019, according to the Organic Survey conducted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Sales of organic U.S. vegetables increased from $1,248 million to $2,084 million during that period, while sales of organic fruits and tree nuts more than tripled from $586 million in 2014 to $2,022 million in 2019. Top organic vegetables grown in the country in 2019 were lettuce ($400.11 million), spinach ($179.50 million), potatoes ($154.94 million), tomatoes (132.33 million), and carrots ($131.81 million); they constituted 47.9 percent of the U.S. organic vegetables sold. On the other hand, 75.8 percent of all organic fruits sales were for apples ($474.70 million), grapes ($332.49 million), strawberries ($320.79 million), blueberries ($205.23 million), and citrus ($115.87 million). In 2019, organic tree nuts sales totaled $109.75 million, and the main crops grown were walnuts, almonds, pecans, pistachios, and hazelnuts.

    Source: USDA Organic Survey data

    Zapata, Samuel. “Growing Value of U.S. Organic Specialty Crop Sales.” Southern Ag Today 1(45.5). November 5, 2021. Permalink