To achieve a strong, powerful bargaining position, New Jersey fruit and 

 vegetable growers must simply get together -- "act in concert" -- become 

 committed to the concept of organizing on a much broader basis for their 

 own mutual benefit. Is the need felt strong enough and the leadership, 

 statesmanship, and sense of obligation within the grower groups of 

 sufficient capacity and dedication to achieve the unity required to do 

 the job? 



Recommendations for Individual Association Action 



There will more than likely be some "shakedowns" within this group 

 of eight organizations, as attrition of the smaller producers takes 

 place along with the increasing pace of urbanization with the corollary 

 expansion of other job opportunities. For example, Beverly could 

 liquidate or move to a more productive area. Swedesboro could merge 

 with Gloucester County. Haramonton could liquidate and its producers 

 shift to the other organizations. Hightstown and Gloucester appear 

 to have rather strong financial underpinnings. Atlantic County has 

 questionable membership support. Cedarville has made substantial 

 facility commitments. 



The firms in this study are composed of highly fragmented, individ- 

 ualistic groups of producers. At best, these organizations inject a 

 competitive element in the South Jersey market structure for fresh 

 fruits and vegetables. Members take advantage -- both in a positive 

 and negative sense -- of their co-ops' presence in the market to 

 enhance their own--as contrasted to their cooperatives' -- marketing 

 efforts. In doing so, this weakens their joint bargaining strength. 

 The net result is a disadvantage rather than an advantage to indi- 

 vidual producers. Their production diversity and varied marketing 

 alternatives do little to encourage a strong unified front to buyers. 

 Pending such time that strong indigenous leadership does emerge, 

 our suggestions are oriented toward the continued existence of the 

 present organizations subject, of course, to the possible changes 

 we alluded to in the preceding discussion,, 



First, we believe that respective boards should decide whether they 

 want their associations to accomplish something more than just in- 

 jecting a weak competitive element into the market structure within 

 which their associations operate. If they visualize their cooper- 

 atives only as instruments merely to make a little competition, then 

 they must accept the fact that their association will command only 

 the minimum patronage of members to the extent that they believe will 

 -make other market outlets competitive » Under these circumstances, 

 members tend to shift their pati'onage to competitors because, by 

 so doing, they are relieved of the responsibility of financing, 

 patronizing, and participating in the management decision making in 

 their co-ops. 



