Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-v2bm5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-12T22:59:05.337Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

State Cooperative Statutes – Conflict of Cooperative Concept with Efficiency

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2017

Terence J. Centner
Terence J. Centner*
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Georgia, Athens
Get access

Abstract

Cooperative statutory provisions that provide for democratic membership control provide limitations affecting the management of cooperatives. Management provisions concerning membership requirements for directors and officers, amendments to articles of incorporation, and removal of officers may unduly restrict the management of cooperatives and contribute to the poor economic performance of Northeastern cooperatives. Minor statutory changes, or changes of a cooperative's articles or by laws, may help improve the performance of these business operations.

Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Journal of the Northeastern Agricultural Economics Council , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , Fall 1983 , pp. 91 - 95
Copyright
Copyright © Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abrahamsen, Martin A. Cooperative Business Enterprise. New York: McGraw Hill Bock Company, 1976.Google Scholar
American Bar Association – American Law Institute. Model Business Corporation Act, Committee on Business Corporations, 1950.Google Scholar
American Law Institute – American Bar Association. Partnerships: UPA, UPLA, Securities, Taxation, and Bankruptcy, Committee on Continuing Professional Education (3rd ed.), 1982.Google Scholar
Cobia, David W. et al. Equity Redemption: Issues and Alternatives for Farmer Cooperatives, Agricultural Cooperative Service Research Report No. 23, USDA, 1982.Google Scholar
Davidson, D.R. and Street, D.W. “Patronage Refunds Drop 44 Percent Reflecting Lower Margins, Losses.” Farmer Cooperatives, 49 (November 1982): 4–7.Google Scholar
Ferguson, C.R. and Dickinson, R. “Critical Success Factors for Directors in the Eighties.” Business Horizons, 25 (1982): 14–18.Google Scholar
Firstenberg, P.B. and Malkiel, B.G. “Why Corporate Boards Need Independent Directors.” Management Review, 69 (April 1980): 26–38.Google Scholar
Greenough, W.C. and Clapman, P.C. “The Role of Independent Directors in Corporate Governance.” Notre Dame Lawyer, 56 (1980): 916–925.Google Scholar
Jain, S.K. “Lock to Outsiders to Strengthen Small Business Boards.” Harvard Business Review, 58 (1980): 162–170.Google Scholar
Lagges, J.G. “The Board of Directors: Boon or Bane for Stockholders and Management?” Business Horizons, 25 (1982): 43–50.Google Scholar
Lauenstein, Milton C. Building and Operating an Effective Board of Directors. New York: The Presidents Association, 1979.Google Scholar
Louden, J. Keith. The Director. New York: AMACOM, 1982.Google Scholar
Mueller, Robert K. New Directions for Directors. Lexington, Massachusetts: Lexington Books, 1978.Google Scholar
Stokes, J.F. “Involving New Directors in Small Company Management.” Harvard Business Review, 58 (1980): 170–174.Google Scholar
Todd, Alan B. (ed.). The Corporation Manual, New York: United States Corporation Company, 1982.Google Scholar