Two Decades of Cooperative Performance Research: Trends and Future Research Suggestions

Cooperatives occupy a distinctive position in the global economy: member-owned, member-controlled enterprises that must simultaneously satisfy market discipline and social purpose. Over the past twenty years, scholarly interest in how to define, measure, and explain cooperative performance has grown substantially, but the field remains fragmented across agricultural economics, management, finance, and the social economy literature. This paper synthesises that body of work through a PRISMA-guided review of systematic literature reviews (SLRs) and bibliometric studies on cooperative performance indexed in Scopus and Web of Science between 2006 and 2026. Thirteen candidate meta-studies were identified and screened, of which nine were retained for narrative synthesis. The review traces a shift from narrow, single-dimension financial and efficiency measures dominant in the mid-2000s toward multidimensional frameworks incorporating governance, member welfare, and since roughly 2018, environmental, social and governance (ESG) and sustainability performance. Methodologically, the field has moved from descriptive and case-based work toward panel-data econometrics, though qualitative and mixed-methods studies remain scarce. The review critically discusses persistent weaknesses endogeneity and self-selection bias, financial-indicator dominance, geographic and sectoral skew toward agricultural cooperatives in Europe and North America, and the absence of a consensus performance construct and offers recommendations for future research, practice, and policy.

cooperative performance; systematic literature review; PRISMA; cooperative governance; sustainability performance

1. Bijman, J., Hanisch, M., & van der Sangen, G. (2014). Shifting control? The changes of internal governance in agricultural cooperatives in the EU. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 85(4), 641–661. https://doi.org/10.1111/apce.12055 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Bijman, J., Hendrikse, G., & van Oijen, A. (2013). Accommodating two worlds in one organisation: Changing board models in agricultural cooperatives. Managerial and Decision Economics, 34(3–5), 204–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.2584 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Candemir, A., Duvaleix, S., & Latruffe, L. (2021). Agricultural cooperatives and farm sustainability – A literature review. Journal of Economic Surveys, 35(4), 1118–1144. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12417 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Chaddad, F. R., Cook, M. L., & Heckelei, T. (2005). Testing for the presence of financial constraints in US agricultural cooperatives: An investment behaviour approach. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 56(3), 385–397. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-9552.2005.00012.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Chaddad, F., & Iliopoulos, C. (2013). Control rights, governance, and the costs of ownership in agricultural cooperatives. Agribusiness, 29(1), 3–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/agr.21328 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Chagwiza, C., Muradian, R., & Ruben, R. (2016). Cooperative membership and dairy performance among smallholders in Ethiopia. Food Policy, 59, 165–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2016.01.008 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Chollet, P., Enjolras, G., Pavez, I., & Saïsset, L.-A. (2026). The sustainability performance of agricultural cooperatives: A systematic literature review. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 97, 321–367. https://doi.org/10.1111/apce.70013 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Cook, M. L. (1995). The future of U.S. agricultural cooperatives: A neo-institutional approach. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 77(5), 1153–1159. https://doi.org/10.2307/1243338 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Cook, M. L., Chaddad, F. R., & Iliopoulos, C. (2004). Advances in cooperative theory since 1990: A review of agricultural economics literature. In G. W. J. Hendrikse (Ed.), Restructuring agricultural cooperatives (pp. 65–89). Erasmus University Rotterdam. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Fischer, E., & Qaim, M. (2012). Linking smallholders to markets: Determinants and impacts of farmer collective action in Kenya. World Development, 40(6), 1255–1268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2011.11.018 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Getnet, K., & Anullo, T. (2012). Agricultural cooperatives and rural livelihoods: Evidence from Ethiopia. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 83(2), 181–198. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8292.2012.00460.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Grashuis, J. (2018). A quantile regression of farmer cooperative performance. Agricultural Finance Review, 78(1), 65–82. https://doi.org/10.1108/AFR-06-2017-0049 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Grashuis, J. (2025). Why are there fewer and fewer cooperatives in the agricultural sector? A survival analysis within a competing risk framework. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/apce.12493 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Grashuis, J., & Su, Y. (2019). A review of the empirical literature on farmer cooperatives: Performance, ownership and governance, finance, and member attitude. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 90(1), 77–102. https://doi.org/10.1111/apce.12205 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Jamaluddin, F., Mohd Saleh, N., Abdullah, A., Hassan, M. S., Hamzah, N., Jaffar, R., Abdul Ghani Aziz, S. A., & Embong, Z. (2023). Cooperative governance and cooperative performance: A systematic literature review. SAGE Open, 13(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231192944 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Liang, Q., Ma, K., & Liu, W. (2023). The role of farmer cooperatives in promoting environmentally sustainable agricultural development in China: A review. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 94(3), 741–759. https://doi.org/10.1111/apce.12408 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151(4), W-65–W-94. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00136 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Linnenluecke, M. K., Marrone, M., & Singh, A. K. (2020). Conducting systematic literature reviews and bibliometric analyses. Australian Journal of Management, 45(2), 175–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/0312896219877678 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Soboh, R. A. M. E., Oude Lansink, A., Giesen, G., & Van Dijk, G. (2009). Performance measurement of the agricultural marketing cooperatives: The gap between theory and practice. Review of Agricultural Economics, 31(3), 446–469. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9353.2009.01448.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Empowering SME Performance Through Social Media: The Mediating Role of Entrepreneurial Orientation in Malaysian Manufacturing SMEs
• Effective School Bullying Prevention Strategies: A Thematic Review
• Impact of Workplace Conflict on the Operational Performance of Deposit Money Banks in Enugu State.
• Towards Digital Financial Solutions: A Conceptual Model of SME Strategies and Strategic Development
• Effect of Work-Life Balance and Affective Commitment on Employee Performance in the Hotel Industry in Plateau State