A cooperative grocer is a store format that has been around for many years and plays a unique role in community food systems. These stores are shopper owned, shareholders that capitalize the stores initially and receive a patronage based on the amount of shopping the do. The National Cooperative Grocers Association reports 165 member co-ops managing 240 storefronts in 37 states – a combined sales over $2.5 billion (NCG, Oct 2024). While more stores tend to be located in the upper Midwest and coastal states, there are strong co-ops across the South.
Stores typically place a strong value on local sourcing, sustainability, wellness, and bulk buying – many had roots in older community buying clubs. And while they tend to be much smaller than regional or national chains, they are quite nimble as they seek to serve the community and local shopper-owners.
Table 1. Food Values from Different KY Shopper Segments
Source: Rossi, J., Allen, J.E., Woods, T.A. et al. CSA shareholder food lifestyle behaviors: a comparison across consumer groups. Agric Hum Values34, 855–869 (2017).
A recent study of shopper values in Kentucky reflects a common difference in food values seen in many food co-ops – a stronger emphasis on community, the environment, and wellness. This generally translates into unique retail product offerings and merchandising around these concepts, including a high value for local and sustainable food connections. Many of these stores, with their smaller size, are better suited to work with smaller supplier vendors and serve as great entry points into wholesale markets.
These grocers, while technically independent, often work together through the National Coop Grocers on issues like governance, capitalization strategies, and advocacy issues. Their commitment to their shopper-owners, vendors, and communities provides a unique platform for these ventures to bring value to the food world not generally found through other store concepts.
You can learn more about the National Cooperative Grocers Association and some of the food co-ops near you at their website: https://www.ncg.coop/about-us
The pecan is one of the most eaten fruit nuts in the USA, with a per capita consumption that increased in the past decade from 0.35 lbs. (2012) to 0.61 lbs. in 2021 due to its nutritional value and improved marketing strategies (USDA, NASS, 2024). Prior to the 2024 hurricane season, there was an 8% decrease in the production of the improved variety of pecan in 2023 compared to 2022 (USDA, NASS, 2024). Georgia, the established number one pecan producing state (USDA, 2019) was badly hit by Hurricane Helene in September 2024, which affected both production areas, crop loss, and tree loss concomitantly (Sawyer, 2024). Reports show that the state of Georgia suffered a loss of 36 million pounds, an estimated 75% pecan crop loss which is estimated at $6.46 billion loss to the Georgia Pecan Industry due to Hurricane Helene (Flood, 2024). With such a huge volume disappearing from the total production, both consumption and future production will be impacted.
Source: Sawyer (2024). Montgomery County GA.
Pecans have many health benefits (Royalty, 2024) and multifaceted uses including eating it raw or fresh as a snack, baking, salads, and cooking exotic cuisines such as pecan-crusted chicken, lamb, fish, and the famous pecan pie, etc.
Pecans have a key spot in the festive season. Decreased production area, crop loss, and tree loss translate into an immediate shortage in the domestic and export markets, respectively.
Consequently, consumers should expect higher pecan prices during the upcoming holidays and festive season. For instance, early-season pecan halves prices were $7 to $8 per pound this year, compared to $4.50 to $5.50 per pound last year (Haire, 2024). Moreover, the industry will also experience a long-term shortage due to the number of trees that were knocked down, losing about 36 million pounds, equivalent to 48,000 acres, with an estimated value of $6.46 billion loss to the entire Georgia Pecan Industry. Despite the USDA, ERS (2024) preliminary ending stock of slightly over 70 million pounds shelled, and the anticipated decrease per capita consumption of 0.51 pounds in 2024 compared to 0.67 pounds in the 2022/2023 crop season, the huge production decrease from Georgia due to Hurricane Helene will be felt in the pocketbook of pecan lovers and consumers this and next year. In addition, the injuries sustained by surviving trees will require time to fully recover, thus putting upward pressure on consumer prices due to persistent shortages (Towfighi, 2024; Haire, 2024).
With the US 2023 population of 334.9 million, the USDA, ERS (2024) preliminary domestic availability of 171 million pounds will be difficult to achieve and place upward pressure on prices paid for pecans across the pecan market value chain.
Haire, B. (2024). “Pecan farmers see high prices for meager crop”. CAES Newswire, College of Agricultural & Environmental Sciences, UGA Cooperative Extension. Online: https://newswire.caes.uga.edu/story/2143/pecan-prices.html (November 04). Accessed December 5, 2024.
Royalty Pecan Farms (2024). “The Power of the Pecan: 7 Health Benefits That Make This The Best Nut on Earth” Online: https://royaltypecans.com/pages/the-power-of-the-pecan-7-health-benefits-pecans , Accessed December 5, 2024.
With the trend of increasing urbanization, Urban Agriculture (UA) has emerged as a key strategy to address challenges like food insecurity and social inequality in urban development. The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the importance of UA by exposing weaknesses in the food supply chain and emphasizing the need for local food security (Clark et al., 2021). Community gardens, a common and impactful form of UA, provide spaces for residents to grow fresh produce in the community while offering environmental and economic benefits (Guitart et al., 2012; Kirby et al., 2021). In 2009, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) initiated the “People’s Garden” program to connect gardens across the U.S. that produce local food to address food insecurity and bring people together in their communities. Community gardens have become central to UA policies to enhance food security and environmental sustainability, particularly in low-income urban neighborhoods.
The need for such initiatives can be critical in the southern U.S., where food insecurity levels are significantly higher than in other regions. For example, although the South has less than half (45%) of the country’s total counties, it disproportionately represents areas with high food insecurity. Specifically, 84% of counties that experience high rates of food insecurity are located in the South (Feeding America, 2024). Community gardens and other UA efforts could play an essential role in alleviating food insecurity in these areas. The density of existing community gardens varies widely by region (Figure 1). Based on self-reported data from the American Community Garden Association, the Northeast has 7.8 community gardens per 1,000 square miles (green bar), while the South has fewer than 2 per 1,000 square miles (turquoise bar).
Figure 1: Distribution of Community Gardens by Region
However, there is growing interest in developing urban gardens in the South, particularly in Texas. For instance, Dallas was recently selected by the USDA as one of 17 cities for urban agriculture investment. The Houston Health Department recently launched the “Get Moving Houston Urban Gardens” initiative to promote healthy eating. Houston currently has over 160 community gardens, mostly in lower-income communities. While community gardens offer many benefits and can help address food insecurity and social inequality—especially in low-income, minority communities in the South—careful planning is essential to ensure these communities fully benefit.
There are important challenges to address when establishing community gardens in low-income, minority communities. First, it is essential to understand residents’ preferences for community gardens in these neighborhoods. Some studies indicate that the culture surrounding local and healthy food from UA is often associated with communities that have higher education levels and incomes (Bellemare and Dusoruth, 2021), while others find no significant differences in preferences for community gardens across income and racial groups (Li & Long, 2024). This variability highlights the need for community-specific assessments to tailor UA initiatives. Engaging residents in planning ensures that the gardens align with the needs of the neighborhood, promoting greater utilization and sustainability. Second, the impact of community gardens on these communities requires further examination. While these gardens can improve access to fresh food and green space, they may also contribute to rising property values (Voicu and Been, 2008), attracting more affluent households and potentially leading to gentrification and displacement of existing residents. Therefore, it is important for city planners to balance the benefits of community gardens with proactive measures to mitigate the potential displacement risks.
Reference:
Bellemare, M. F., & Dusoruth, V. (2021). Who participates in urban agriculture? An empirical analysis. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 43(1), 430-442.
Clark, J. K., Conley, B., & Raja, S. (2021). Essential, fragile, and invisible community food infrastructure: The role of urban governments in the United States. Food Policy, 103, 102014.
Guitart, D., Pickering, C., & Byrne, J. (2012). Past results and future directions in urban community gardens research. Urban forestry & urban greening, 11(4), 364-373.
Kirby, C. K., Specht, K., Fox-Kämper, R., Hawes, J. K., Cohen, N., Caputo, S., … & Blythe, C. (2021). Differences in motivations and social impacts across urban agriculture types: Case studies in Europe and the US. Landscape and Urban Planning, 212, 104110.
Li, L., & Long, D. (2024). Who values urban community gardens and how much?. Food Policy, 126, 102649.
Voicu, I., & Been, V. (2008). The effect of community gardens on neighboring property values. Real Estate Economics, 36(2), 241-283.
An effective board is a collection of “good leaders.” But how do we measure leadership and how do we create an effective board? Research shows that leaders are measured as “good” when they marshal all their skills, and abilities, and use their influence to affect and be affected by others (Northouse, 2016). Training new or existing individual board members and preparing them to serve others is the heart of producing good leaders. This can be accomplished by utilizing extension resources and participating in leadership development programs.
In a rapidly changing and uncertain world, cooperative boards of directors face enormous internal and external challenges. Many of these challenges stem from factors not in their control yet consume a great deal of attention. Other challenges more routine, are relegated to management, diluting the board’s influence over new strategy or direction. This may perpetuate the perception that the professional manager is more equipped to oversee leadership issues. The complexity of these challenges requires a higher-level thinking and superior board leadership to mitigate shifts in customer needs, profitability, and future sustainability.
Usually, leadership development training for co-ops, stems from informal, unstructured, and “on-the-job” training. Although experience is a great asset, this learning process lacks the rigor of leadership technique and understanding and should not replace profession governance principles. The truth is new and continual leadership training is an essential activity in building effective boards and successful businesses. The responsibility of the governing board of directors is to lead strategically and intentionally to ensure sound governance prevails. The goal of the co-op should be to thrive, not simply survive.
Therefore, it is incumbent that co-ops should evaluate director performance and provide training opportunities for improvement. More importantly, a comprehensive and multidimensional approach to teaching effective leadership will not only grow better leaders but will lay the groundwork for a culture of continual learning.
Fortunately, a well-researched framework and teaching model has emerged to help both new and seasoned leaders build and hone their personal leadership skills. The Multidimensional Leadership Model & Assessment, (Friend, 2020), identifies six leadership competencies and measures an individual’s proficiency in each level. Different from other management training, this model recognizes the unique skill set necessary to govern effectively. The six areas measured are consciousness, conduct, connectedness, interaction, representation, and cooperation.
The Leadership Lab website provides an online assessment tool to help individuals expand their leadership capacity, helping to serve effectively on a board. Developed by Texas A&M University researchers and co-op extension practitioners, the Leadership Lab integrates a grounded theory with practical application for leadership improvement. At the Leadership Lab, you can find the Multidimensional Leadership Assessment tool, which will measure all six competencies, providing participants with immediate feedback and suggestions to correct leadership deficiencies. Generally interrelated, competence and board effectiveness complement the qualities of the individual director, which improves dynamics in the boardroom and strengthens organizational performance (Coulson-Thomas, 1994). By assessing individual director competency and providing prescriptive suggestions for improvement, the collective board is strengthened and performs better. The Leadership Lab offers co-op directors, other boards of directors, and individuals the opportunity to learn and grow into the leaders they want to be.
If interested in learning more and accessing the multidimensional leadership assessment, go to: leadershiplab.online
References:
Coulson-Thomas, C. (1994). Developing directors: Building an effective boardroom team. Journal of European Industrial Training, 18(6), 29-52.
Friend, D. (2020). Texas agricultural cooperatives: A study in governing competencies. Texas A&M University, Dissertation.
Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
U.S. market awareness of mango, the world’s “King of Fruits,” has risen significantly since the new millennium began. In 2021, value-added fresh fruit aisles across US food outlets witnessed a 27.3% increase in dollar sales over the previous calendar year (Fig. 1). Chefs and home cooks continue to find ways to incorporate fresh-cut mango into menu offerings as a standalone fruit and as an ingredient in salsa, dessert, beverage recipes, and numerous other innovative uses. Industry experts are optimistic about future demand growth rates of ten percent or more over the next five to ten years for value-added mango. To continue introducing consumers to this nutrient-rich fruit’s candy-like flavor, we talked with industry professionals who work with value-added produce to learn how growers may better position themselves to sell into this supply chain.
Figure 1. Total U.S. multi-outlet fresh fruit and vegetable sales, nonvalue and value-added, 2021.
Source: Strailey, J. (2022, 28 February). “Value-added fresh produce sees continued growth.” The Packer.com.
While there exists an array of mango varieties available to the market, the Kent variety is preferred by large processors and food distributors, as it is less stringy, possesses a recognizable flavor profile, and is more suitable for processing in both size and year-round availability. There exists potential for smaller growers to process and market US-grown varieties to consumers who are looking for new and unique palate-pleasing flavors and textures for their menus.
Currently, a barrier to increased fresh fruit consumption and value-added processing is the difficulty (and injury risk) in peeling and coring mangos. There is potential for exploration and development of small-scale microtechnologies that may reduce the labor time and expense required to process mangos. We encourage entrepreneurial-minded growers to work with craftspeople to design and develop such equipment at costs that may be affordable to smaller-scale processors.
Adopting and adhering to a written food safety plan is of paramount importance for all participants in the mango industry across all product forms and marketing outlets. We recommend that growers invest time and resources in educating themselves and everyone involved in their supply chain to ensure regulatory compliance and transparency to buyers and auditors. This investment will provide dividends in the form of long-term business success, maintenance of customer relationships, and overall growth of the mango industry.
Sustainability factors, such as carbon neutrality, waste reduction, and fair labor practices, are growing important to the agricultural industry. Each of these factors impacts the bottom line of a value-added business, whether in the form of market access, financial performance, or impacts of regulatory policies and procedures. We suggest that Southeastern mango growers and processors spend time discussing and gathering information from company leadership, managers, and employees to review the variables in sustainable practices and implement a select few that best match the fruit grower’s mission and core values.
Funding Statement: This work was supported by the National Mango Board.
