Social Capital among Members in Grain Marketing Cooperatives of Different Sizes

Li, Feng; Friis, Anna; Nilsson, Jerker

doi:10.1002/agr.21427

Cited by 73 publications

(63 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In this regard, Nilsson, Kihlén and Norell (2009), in an empirical survey among members of a large traditional Swedish cooperative, show that when members consider the cooperative to be too large and too complex to be controlled by the membership, the members' satisfaction and involvement levels decrease, which in turn is associated with poor trust in the cooperative board and management. In line with this result, Feng, Friis and Nilsson (2015) show empirically that the larger the cooperative, the lower the social capital, expressed in terms of members' involvement, trust, satisfaction, and loyalty.…”

Section: Mobilizing and Sustaining Social Capitalsupporting

confidence: 67%

Trust, Social Capital, and the Coordination of Relationships Between the Members of Cooperatives: A Comparison Between Member-Focused Cooperatives and Third-Party-Focused Cooperatives

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, nonprofit scholars have increasingly studied the phenomenon of social enterprises which has become a generic term describing a wider reorientation among third sector organizations. The emergence of social enterprises has also led to a dynamic of hybridization and broadening in the cooperative sector, similar to an earlier dynamic of "economization", but this time on the other end of the organizational spectrum. This paper aims at developing a finegrained conceptual understanding of how this organizational dynamic is shaped in terms of member coordination, thus contributing to a more comprehensive theoretical understanding of different organizational forms of cooperatives. Specifically, to highlight the difference to traditional member-focused cooperatives, the paper introduces the term third-party-focused cooperatives for those social enterprises which emphasize economic goals as well as control and ownership by a particular community (typically place-based). The key result of the paper is that with the shift from member-to community-focus in cooperatives, the main coordination mechanism becomes one of norm-based trust on the basis of generalized reciprocity. In contrast to traditional maxim-based trust member coordination on the basis of relation-specific reciprocity, this enables third-party-focused cooperatives to mobilize bridging and linking social capital, facilitating collective action aimed towards the community interest. The findings suggest that this identity shift requires a mutual re-positioning between the cooperative and the nonprofit sector, in terms of umbrellas as well as regulatory and legislative bodies.

show abstract

Section: Mobilizing and Sustaining Social Capitalsupporting

confidence: 67%

Trust, Social Capital, and the Coordination of Relationships Between the Members of Cooperatives: A Comparison Between Member-Focused Cooperatives and Third-Party-Focused Cooperatives

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Size also featured as the variable of interest in the empirical study of Feng et al. (). However, with survey responses from members of three different cooperatives, Feng et al.…”

Section: Member Attitudementioning

confidence: 99%

A Review of the Empirical Literature on Farmer Cooperatives: Performance, Ownership and Governance, Finance, and Member Attitude

Grashuis

2018

Ann Public Coop Econ

142

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The empirical literature on farmer cooperatives is now fast emerging and developing in the areas of performance, ownership and governance, finance, and member attitude. We discuss 56 peer‐reviewed publications to illustrate the main findings and conclusions while outlining challenges and opportunities for future research. Generally, cooperative membership is found to positively impact price, yield, input adoption, income, and other indicators of member performance, yet there is growing evidence of an uneven distribution of benefits for small and large producers. In terms of structure, evidence of a causal relationship of ownership and governance to performance has been elusive, yet there are now many findings of inherent equity and long‐term debt constraints, often in the context of consolidation to drive scale and scope economies. Further inefficiency is observed to be driven by increased heterogeneity in member attitudes and objectives, in particular in terms of commitment and participation. Thus, overall, empirical work portrays farmer cooperatives as flawed and complex business organizations which nonetheless have a strong positive impact on its members. While applied research may progress in various directions, a general improvement in empirical methodologies is needed to allow robust analysis of mixed objectives in dynamic environments.

show abstract

“…In line with Feng et al (2014), the following four social capital indicators were used in the present study: Involvement, trust, satisfaction and loyalty. Each of these variables was operationalized into one or more items in the questionnaire used in the collection of data.…”

Section: Social Capital Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%