The Midwestern U.S. landscape is one of the most highly altered and intensively managed ecosystems in the country. The predominant crops grown are maize (Zea mays L.) and soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr]. They are typically grown as monocrops in a simple yearly rotation or with multiple years of maize (2 to 3) followed by a single year of soybean. This system is highly productive because the crops and management systems have been well adapted to the regional growing conditions through substantial public and private investment. Furthermore, markets and supporting infrastructure are highly developed for both crops. As maize and soybean production have intensified, a number of concerns have arisen due to the unintended environmental impacts on the ecosystem. Many areas across the Midwest are experiencing negative impacts on water quality, soil degradation, and increased flood risk due to changes in regional hydrology. The water quality impacts extend even further downstream. We propose the development of an innovative system for growing maize and soybean with perennial groundcover to recover ecosystem services historically provided naturally by predominantly perennial native plant communities. Reincorporating perennial plants into annual cropping systems has the potential of restoring ecosystem services without negatively impacting grain crop production and offers the prospect of increasing grain crop productivity through improving the biological functioning of the system.

The novel coronavirus SARS‐CoV2 (COVID‐19) severely disrupted the U.S. food supply chain. In its initial aftermath, and as we contemplate a potential reignition, the food supply chain industries, researchers, and policy makers search for evidence, causes, and consequences. This article uses publicly available data on the pork and egg industries and a survey of the turkey industry as a first step to document the impact of COVID‐19. Researchers can learn from the experiences in industries where disruptions evolve differently in the face of simultaneous supply‐ and demand‐side shocks and that stem from differences in structures of the supply chains. This early evidence is used to motivate future research needs and highlight opportunities for industry investments in resiliency strategies.

No abstract

Purpose – There is little reason a priori to expect that a cooperative firm’s capital needs are different from a non-cooperative firm’s needs if the two firms are otherwise similar in function and size and operate within similar market economies. However, the notion that cooperatives face capital constraints that investor-owned firms (IOFs) do not is a persistent theme in the literature. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach – The authors revisit this hypothesis with an empirical examination of capital constraints in a panel data set of US agricultural supply and grain cooperatives and IOFs. Findings – The findings are mixed. While the authors find little to suggest that cooperatives face financial constraints on borrowing in the short run, relative to IOFs, the authors do find some evidence that for long-term investments, a capital constraint may exist. Originality/value – These short and long run differences have implications for the survival and growth of agricultural cooperatives. While in the short run, access to debt financing allows these firms to operative profitably, ultimately long-term large investments in technology and fixed assets will be required to maintain competitiveness in this industry.

In recent years three important trends have become apparent among grain marketing and farm supply cooperatives. These farmer owned firms have been rapidly investing in infrastructure, reformulating profit distribution and equity strategies, and have pursued consolidation with other cooperatives. This manuscript explores the factors contributing to those trends, the implications for cooperatives leaders, and the impacts on farmer members. Abstract: In recent years three important trends have become apparent among grain marketing and farm supply cooperatives. These farmer owned firms have been rapidly investing in infrastructure, reformulating profit distribution and equity strategies, and have pursued consolidation with other cooperatives. This manuscript explores the factors contributing to those trends, the implications for cooperatives leaders, and the impacts on farmer members.