|
Farmers Seek Bigger Piece
of the Pie
Tired
of Low Commodity prices, Producers Branch Out into Processing, Marketing
By Jim Worstell
Jim Worstell, Ph.D., is coordinator of the Delta Enterprise Network,
a consortium of universities, businesses, farmers and elected officials
working for sustainable, value-added diversification. He has helped
develop farmer-owned processing and marketing enterprises in 10
states and 14 countries.
The twin scourges of many rural areas today are low commodity prices
and high unemployment.
The gap between what the farmer is paid for commodities and what
the consumer pays for the end product is widening, making farming
a difficult business. Unemployment is high in rural areas that have
traditionally depended on agriculture.
| Delta
Enterprise Network |
|
Arkansas Municipal League
|
|
Delta Caucus
|
|
Arkansas Delta Council
|
|
University of Missouri Outreach and Extension
|
|
Delta Land & Community
|
|
University of Kentucky/Kentucky State Cooperative Extension
|
|
University of Arkansas-Pine Bluff
|
|
University of Tennessee Extension
|
|
University of Illinois Extension
|
|
USDA/Rural Development (Missouri, Illinois, Tennessee)
|
|
USDA/Natural Resources Conservation Service (Missouri)
|
|
Missouri Department of Agriculture
|
|
Kentucky Department of Agriculture
|
|
Various local chambers of commerce
|
|
|
Is there a silver lining in this dark cloud? Several organizations
in Missouri, Kentucky, Illinois, Tennessee and Arkansas think so.
These organizations have united in the Delta Enterprise Network
(DEN) to add value to existing commodities and to diversify the
rural economy of the Delta.
In real dollars, the trend lines for commodity prices have been
negative for decades. In recent years, prices of commodities produced
by farmers have experienced a free fall. According to the World
Bank, agricultural commodity prices fell nearly 32 percent worldwide
between 1997 and 2001.
These trends are likely to continue because of large production
increases each year in many crops, according to the World Bank.
Money is being made in agriculture, but in processing and marketing,
not in commodity production. A 1998 study by Richard L. Kohls and
Joseph N. Uhl of Purdue University showed that by the late 1990s,
the farmer received 22 percent of the consumer dollar, and the remaining
78 percent went to processing and marketing. The return on investment
in agricultural processing and marketing is among the highest of
any industry, in part because of low commodity prices.
Rise of Producer-Owned Marketing and Processing
The challenge of low commodity prices combined with the opportunity
for value-added profits has prompted various state and federal agencies
to establish programs to help farmers not only produce commodities
but also develop marketing and processing ventures. These ventures
allow farmers to capture a larger portion of the price consumers
pay for food. Farmers become entrepreneurs instead of relying on
decreasing commodity prices and government subsidies.
In some parts of the United States, these programs were implemented
more than 10 years ago. The result has been that the number of producer-owned
value-added ventures has rapidly increased in the past decade.
 |
|
| Source:
C.D. Merrett, M. Holmes, and J. Waner. Directory of New Generation
Cooperatives (Macomb: Illinois Institute for Rural Affairs,
1999) Published in A Cooperative Approach to Local Economic
Development, ed. C.D. Merrett and N. Walzer, 2001. |
|
Agencies Have United in Delta Enterprise Network
Though most of these new farmer-owned ventures are located in the
upper Midwest, many people in the mid-South are eager to create
similar opportunities in their region. In the past two years, a
number of agencies interested in value-added diversification have
joined together to tackle the work. These groups have provided agents
to help farmers create dozens of new businesses. DEN participants
have visited and analyzed successful value-added diversification
programs in North Dakota, Minnesota, New Zealand and Australia and
have adapted these programs in Missouri, Illinois, Tennessee and
Kentucky.
All of these programs have five common elements. Entrepreneurs who
participate must complete each stage before moving to the next tier.
DEN's network of agencies provides professional help at each
stage.
The sequential steps are:
1. Initial organizing
Each of the aforementioned programs has a variety of web sites,
conferences and activities to help educate farmers about opportunities.
DEN has worked with institutions in Missouri, Kentucky and Tennessee
to establish statewide conferences to promote such opportunities
and resources.
After farmers learn about new processing and marketing opportunities,
agents from cooperative extensions or other local development agencies
help the farmers define a specific product and market they would
like to pursue. The foremost example of an organization that provides
agents in the Delta states is Missouri's Agricultural Business
Counselor program.
2. Competitive grant funds for feasibility
analysis
In this stage, farmers seek funding for a feasibility study to ensure
they are pursuing a profitable venture. This type of analysis has
proved beneficial in programs around the country as long as the
feasibility studies are performed by experts in each industry. Sometimes
the answer "no" is the best result from a feasibility
study.
3. Hiring expertise in the industry
No matter how sophisticated those involved in forming the new enterprise
are, they will invariably need the services of someone who works
in the industry. For example, funding from North Dakota's successful
Agricultural Products Utilization Commission (APUC) enabled Dakota
Growers Pasta Co. to attract an experienced general manager for
its first pasta plant. In Iowa, the Department of Agriculture's
Rural Economic Value-Added Mentoring Program sends mentors experienced
in a particular industry to help cooperatives move to the next stage.
University of Kentucky Cooperative Extension facilitators operate
at this stage to bring in the foremost experts available in marketing
and production in the industry.
Minnesota's Agricultural Utilization Research Institute (AURI)
brings another level of mentor to developing enterprises. The institute
employs scientists who have considerable experience in selected
key industries that are important to Minnesota. These scientists
then work with local facilitators and principals in each enterprise
to solve problems in new product design or production. Many other
regional rural development programs also recruit outside mentors
to assist in highly technical aspects of industries new to particular
communities. Likewise, when a community is attempting to penetrate
a new market, North Dakota's APUC, Minnesota's AURI and
Missouri's Department of Agriculture will find someone who
is working in the thick of that market to advise the farmers.
There is one lesson all of these new regional development efforts
have learned: The entrepreneur, rather than the university, needs
to keep control of product development or marketing studies money.
The universities can often perform valuable research in these areas,
but only if directly controlled by the principal in the business.
Other states and regions have heeded the siren call of academe and
suffered through marketing studies that were not performed in conjunction
with any real business and product development research.
4. Funding for prospectus and equity drive
Some regional development entities, such as Kentucky Highlands Investment
Corp., provide initial equity for a company and fund development
of a prospectus to attract the additional needed capital.
In other cases, the prospectus is funded by early investors recruited
to the project in the first three stages of the process. Other regional
development entities, such as 21st Century Alliance in Kansas, require
potential participants to provide seed money to cover these early
costs. After each project is fully capitalized, the seed money is
repaid.
The core funding for the new value-added industries is obtained
from local farmers, though loan programs to purchase stock are available
from some financial institutions.
Usually, such equity drives try to raise 30 percent to 40 percent
of the needed investment.
Many of these new businesses are farmer-owned, limited equity cooperatives
that own the processing and marketing concerns. This legal structure
requires a sizable up-front investment by farmers. Farmers purchase
delivery rights and responsibilities when they purchase their shares.
For example, a farmer purchasing $20,000 in shares of a pasta cooperative
would be agreeing to deliver 20,000 bushels of wheat of a defined
quality to the cooperative at harvest. The cooperative agrees to
buy his wheat at market price and return a share of the profits
to him and to the other owners when the pasta made from the wheat
is sold.
These delivery rights are totally saleable and typically appreciate
in value several percent a year. During the last decade, these limited
equity, or new generation, cooperatives have spread throughout the
United States from their original toehold in the sugar beet country
of the Red River Valley between North Dakota and Minnesota.
5. Assisting with access to low-interest capital
The remainder of investment costs are achieved with the fifth component--helping
businesses obtain capital with interest rates as low as possible.
In Iowa, enterprises that reach this stage are eligible for the
Value-added Agricultural Products and Processes Financial Assistance
Program. This program provides a combination of loans and forgivable
loans to cooperative efforts that accomplish all previous steps
of the process. Missouri provides saleable tax credits. Texas has
a low-interest bond program. The list of creative financing options
is as long as the list of agencies engaged in this sort of work.
And that list grows longer every day.
Assessment of Successful Programs
To assess the impact that one such value-added diversification program
had on a state's economy, North Dakota State University's
Department of Agricultural Economics analyzed 11 projects in 1996
that had been funded with $867,381 from the North Dakota APCU. These
11 projects helped create businesses that directly added $84.5 million
to North Dakota's annual economy. Secondary economic benefits
amounted to an additional $160 million each year. Thus, the utilization
commission asserted that its direct annual return on investment
for these 11 projects was $97 for each dollar spent, and its total
return (including secondary benefits) was $297 for each dollar spent.
The 1996 study performed by the university concluded by saying,
"the projects sponsored by the North Dakota Agricultural Products
Utilization Commission are adding value to the state's agricultural
commodities and thereby creating new jobs, gross business volume
and tax revenues for the state economy. The economic contributions
of these projects is substantial on a statewide basis and even more
impressive at the local level."
| A
Survey of Policies |
|
In a report called Value-Added Agriculture Policies Across
the 50 States, the U.S. Department of Agriculture reviews
various ways in which states support value-added agriculture.
The report contains charts and maps that show the differences
between states and the impact on agribusiness in rural areas.
The report is available online at http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ruralamerica/ra161/ra161c.pdf
or by calling 1-800-999-6779 and asking for Rural America,
Vol. 16, No.1.
|
Information on DEN is available at www.deltanetwork.org.
back
to top
|