Perception of Resilience: A Member's Perspective on German Agricultural Marketing Cooperatives

Perception of Resilience: A Member's Perspective on German Agricultural Marketing Cooperatives | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Perception of Resilience: A Member's Perspective on German Agricultural Marketing Cooperatives Marius Michels, Lorenz Schmidt This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7303760/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Cooperatives account for 40% of the agricultural market share in the European Union. This study investigates the factors influencing perceived resilience in German agricultural marketing cooperatives. Drawing on the resilience theory, we examine how not only robustness, adaptability and transformability, but also cooperative principles contribute to members' perceptions of their organization's resilience. Using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM), we analyze survey data from 144 agricultural marketing cooperative’s members collected online in Germany in 2024. Our findings reveal that all four factors statistically significantly contribute to perceived resilience, with cooperative values and principles showing the strongest influence. Our results suggest that while traditional resilience capacities like robustness, adaptability and transformability are important, the cooperative model itself, represented by its values and principles, plays a crucial role in members' perceptions of resilience. These results have important implications for cooperative management, suggesting that reinforcing cooperative values while developing balanced resilience strategies could enhance member confidence and organizational resilience. Thus, this study contributes to the growing literature on resilience by incorporating the unique aspects of cooperative organizations and emphasizing the role of member perceptions beyond the agricultural context. Agricultural Economics & Policy agricultural marketing cooperatives partial least squares structural equation modelling perceived resilience resilience Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 1 Introduction Walker et al. (2004, p. 4) define resilience 1 as the “the capacity of a system to absorb disturbance and reorganize while undergoing change so as to still retain essentially the same function, structure and feedbacks”. Resilience is a term that appears again and again in scientific and political debates. The popularity of this concept stems from political and economic volatility and uncertainty (Darnhofer, 2014). Resilience plays a crucial role for the survival and continued existence of companies and organizations (e.g. Lampel et al., 2014; Rai et al., 2021). While resilience is crucial for all organizations, it takes on particular meaning in the cooperative context due their unique organizational form and ownership. For instance, Davis (2009) argue that the relationship between membership and governance can play a part in reducing resilience for short-term financial benefits. Cooperatives, as value-oriented organizations owned by their members (Hill and Doluschitz, 2014; Billiet et al., 2021) uniquely combine economic viability, social responsibility and long-term sustainability (Nüssel, 2013; Schmale, 2020). The cooperative values and principles form the basis of the cooperative identity, regardless of the economic sector in which the cooperative operates (Hill and Doluschitz, 2014). The cooperative business model has been attributed as being more resilient than other organizational forms especially in times of crises and shocks (Birchall and Ketilson, 2009; Adams et al., 2016; Balk and Schaffhaus-Linzatti, 2021; Elsen, 2022). Borda-Rodriguez and Vicari (2014) as well as Billiet et al. (2021) highlight that membership and the centrality of members in cooperatives notably contribute to the cooperatives’ resilience. Member resilience perceptions are crucial in the cooperative context, as they can influence participation, loyalty and overall cooperative performance. However, and to the best of our knowledge, a cooperative’s resilience has not yet been explored from a members’ point of view 2 .. With the European Commission (2020) calling for strengthening the Europeans’ food system’s resilience, the term resilience received a lot of attention from agricultural researchers 3 as a result. Farmers face multiple challenges such as climate change and need to adapt and transform to cope with these challenges which highlights the need for a resilient agri-food system (Feindt et al., 2022). While much research has focused on the agricultural system’s resilience (e.g. Meuwissen et al., 2022), less attention has been paid to key stakeholder’s perceptions, despite notable exceptions such as Perrin et al. (2020), and these studies mostly focus on only one resilience capacity (Spiegel et al., 2021). Based on the framework by Meuwissen et al. (2019), recent studies have begun exploring multiple resilience capacities. For instance, Slijper et al. (2020) explored how risk capacities are related to perceived resilience based on a survey with Dutch farmers applying structural equation modelling (SEM). They found that high perceived resilience capacities lead to higher perceived resilience 4 . Within these agricultural systems, agricultural marketing cooperatives 5 play an enormous role as an interface between the farms and the factor as well as product markets (Kühl and Hanf, 1985), which ensures the farms functionality through its supply of inputs and purchase of outputs as well as other services such as consulting (Hanf and Kühl, 2005; Schulze, 2012; Gollisch and Theuvsen, 2015). However, and to the best of our knowledge, agricultural marketing cooperative’s members 6 have not been in the focus of (perceived) resilience research yet given the important role of agricultural marketing cooperatives in the agricultural and food systems (e.g. Hanf and Kühl, 2005) and the importance of members in cooperatives (Billiet et al., 2021). Therefore, this study aims to examine the factors influencing perceived member’s resilience in German agricultural marketing cooperatives 7 . By addressing the two identified research gaps, we aim to contribute to the growing literature body on (agricultural) resilience while providing practical insights for cooperative management. Drawing on the framework developed by Meuwissen et al. (2019) and adapted by Slijper et al. (2020), this study investigates how resilience capacities robustness, adaptability and transformability contribute to perceived resilience. Additionally, recognizing the unique nature of cooperatives, we extend this framework to include cooperative values and principles as a potential factor influencing perceived resilience. For this purpose, this study employs a quantitative approach, using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) to analyze survey data collected from 144 German agricultural marketing cooperative’s members in 2024. This methodological approach allows us to examine the relationships between different resilience capacities and perceived resilience while accounting for the unique characteristics of cooperative organizations. By investigating the factors that shape perceived resilience in agricultural marketing cooperatives, this study aims to provide valuable insights for cooperative leaders, members and researchers. With cooperatives accounting for 40% of the agricultural market share in the European Union, understanding these dynamics can help develop strategies to strengthen the resilience and ultimately contributing to the sustainability of the broader agricultural sector (Bijman, 2012). 8 . Furthermore, this study makes several unique contributions to the literature. First, it extends the framework of Meuwissen et al. (2019) by incorporating cooperative values and principles as a potential factor influencing perceived resilience, thus adapting the model specifically to the cooperative context. Second, it focuses on members' perceptions of resilience in agricultural marketing cooperatives, an area that has been largely overlooked in previous research. Finally, by examining the interplay between traditional resilience capacities (robustness, adaptability, transformability) and cooperative values and principles, this study provides insights into how organizational structure and governance impact stakeholder perceptions of resilience, extending its relevance beyond the agricultural sector to broader organizational and economic context. In detail, by incorporating cooperative values and principles as a key factor in perceived resilience, we contribute to the broader understanding of how organizational structure and governance impact stakeholder perceptions and organizational resilience. The remainder of this article reads as follows: In the next section the conceptual framework to assess predictors of perceived resilience is presented. In the third section, the survey, data collection as well as the estimation techniques is described. Results are presented and discussed in the fourth section. Furthermore, limitations of this study are stated. The article ends with some concluding remarks. 2 Conceptual Framework The conceptual framework for this study is grounded in understanding the resilience within agricultural systems (Meuwissen et al., 2019), with a specific focus on the adaptation to agricultural marketing cooperatives. Resilience in agricultural systems refers to these system’s capacity to absorb disturbances, to reorganize and to continue functioning when change arises. The resilience concept in agriculture encompasses three key resilience capacities: robustness, adaptability and transformability (Meuwissen et al., 2019). Agricultural marketing cooperatives represent the cooperatively organized agricultural trade (Hanf and Kühl, 2005) and play a vital role in the agricultural sector by giving farmers access to sales and supply markets and providing advisory services (Schulze, 2012; Gollisch and Theuvsen, 2015). As part of the supply chains in the food systems, these agricultural marketing cooperatives like farms face several challenges, experience volatilities and uncertain business environments (Zhao et al., 2017; Tse et al., 2021). Cooperative organizations, like agricultural marketing cooperatives, have a unique characteristic in terms of their shared cooperative values and principles (Hill and Doluschitz, 2014) and high membership valuation (Ringle, 2012). Recognizing these unique characteristics is crucial for developing a comprehensive framework of perceived resilience in (agricultural marketing) cooperatives. Based on the framework by Meuwissen et al. (2019), robustness, in the context of agricultural marketing cooperatives, refers to the ability of these organizations to withstand shocks and continue functioning without substantial changes to their structure or operations. Adaptability, on the other hand, relates to the cooperative's capacity to adjust its strategies, products or services in response to changing conditions. This might involve adopting new technologies, exploring new market opportunities or modifying organizational processes. Transformability represents the most profound level of change, involving the cooperative’s ability to fundamentally alter its structure or function when existing conditions become untenable. This could include major shifts in business models or entering entirely new markets. Cooperative values and principles, such as democratic member control, member economic participation and concern for community, form the foundation of the cooperative model (Steiner and Schütt, 2011; Hill and Doluschitz, 2014). The shared cooperative values and principles (e.g. solidarity) contribute to the formation of social capital (e.g. bonds/relationships between members), which contributes to resilience (Williams et al., 2017). Cooperative values and principles can therefore be understood as a resilience capacity. Hence, the perceived adherence or valuation of these values may play an important role in shaping agricultural marketing cooperative’s perceived resilience. For instance, the principle of member economic participation could contribute to financial robustness, while democratic member control might enhance adaptability through diverse decision-making inputs. Perceived resilience for members in agricultural marketing cooperatives in line with Spiegel et al. (2021), refers to members' subjective assessment of their cooperative's ability to withstand, adapt to and recover from challenges. Hence, all three resilience capacities as well as the cooperatives values principles jointly shape’ members perception of (future) resilience. Therefore, in line with Slijper et al. (2020) and Williams et al. (2017), it can be expected that higher perceived robustness, adaptability and transformability are related to higher perceived (future) agricultural marketing cooperative’s resilience. Likewise, adhering to and supporting cooperative values and principles are related to higher perceived resilience. Based on this conceptual framework, we propose four hypotheses: H1: Robustness has a statistically significant positive effect on perceived resilience in agricultural marketing cooperatives. H2: Adaptability has a statistically significant positive effect on perceived resilience in agricultural marketing cooperatives. H3: Transformability has a statistically significant positive effect on perceived resilience in agricultural marketing cooperatives. H4: Adherence to and support of cooperative values and principles has a statistically significant positive effect on perceived resilience in agricultural marketing cooperatives. These hypotheses are visually represented in the conceptual model presented in Figure 1. The model illustrates the proposed relationships between the three resilience capacities (robustness, adaptability and transformability) as well as cooperative values and principles as predictors of perceived resilience. 3 Material and Methods 3.1 Survey design and data collection The standardized online survey can be divided into four parts, whereby only the first three parts are relevant for this article. In the first part, the participants were asked to rate several statements regarding the resilience capacities as well as cooperatives values and principles on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = high disagreement; 5 = high agreement). The following term descriptions were given to the participants beforehand. By providing a short description, we ensured that all participants have the same understanding of these terms for evaluating the statements. The descriptions of the resilience capacity terms were based on Meuwissen et al. ( 2019 ), Slijper et al. ( 2020 ), Spiegel et al. ( 2021 ) as well as 18 qualitative semi-structured interviews with executives from agricultural marketing cooperatives 9 , which were conducted before the online survey. The description of the cooperative values and principles is based on the Internal Cooperative Alliance, Steiner and Schütt ( 2011 ) as well as Birchall and Ketilson ( 2009 ). Robustness in the context of an agricultural marketing cooperative means the ability to cope with external disturbances such as market fluctuations or political changes without altering its fundamental function, structure or identity. Robustness also refers to how quickly the cooperative can absorb external disturbances and economic setbacks and how rapidly it can recover from them. A robust marketing cooperative has, for example, stable and diverse sales channels, resilient supply chains, and financial structures that remain stable even in difficult times. A robust marketing cooperative can also act sustainably in times of crisis and contribute to maintaining the social fabric in rural areas. Adaptability in the context of an agricultural marketing cooperative is the ability to adapt to changing market trends, customer preferences and technologies. This could include, for example, offering new products or adapting to digital market conditions. Transformability in the context of an agricultural marketing cooperative is the cooperative's ability to implement comprehensive changes to remain relevant and competitive in the long term. This may include restructuring business models, exploring new markets or transitioning to more sustainable practices. Resilience in the context of an agricultural marketing cooperative is the cooperative's ability to take preparatory measures to cope with challenges, mitigate immediate crisis consequences and adapt to changed framework conditions. A resilient cooperative would be able to quickly respond to unexpected events, implement effective crisis management strategies and learn from experiences to improve its adaptability. Cooperative values include self-help, self-responsibility, democracy, equality, equity and solidarity. Cooperative principles include voluntary and open membership, democratic member control, member economic participation, autonomy and independence, education, training and information, cooperation among cooperatives, and concern for the community. In the second part of the survey, members were asked about their involvement and communication in their agricultural marketing cooperative. Here, too, they were asked to give a rating on an equally distributed 5-point Likert scale. In the third part of the survey, members were asked for socio-demographic information 10 . For the online survey, a link was created. This link was sent to the 18 participants from the qualitative interviews with a request to forward it to all cooperative members, regardless of their position (member, employee, management). Additionally, the link was sent to the German Raiffeisen Association (DRV) with a request to forward it to all agricultural marketing cooperatives and to ask them to distribute it to their members. The survey was conducted from March 2024 to July 2024. In total, 1390 people followed the link to the survey, but only 144 followed the survey through until the end and completed it. These 144 responses could be used for the analysis. As compensation, participants received the option to receive €10 or donate it. Furthermore, participants could choose whether they wanted to participate in a raffle for five construction site radios. Participants could also select whether they would like to receive a short summary of the results after the completing the project. 3.2 Estimation techniques Structural equation modeling (SEM) is used to analyze cause-and-effect relationships between variables that cannot be directly observed. These variables, known as latent variables or constructs, are inferred from indicators, which are responses collected through surveys. Specifically, PLS-SEM focuses on maximizing the explained variance (R 2 ) of a primary or key construct (Hair et al., 2014 ; Hair et al., 2011 ) such as agricultural marketing cooperative members’ perceived resilience (Hair et al., 2022 ). The evaluation of PLS-SEM models involves two steps. In the first step, the relationship between indicators and constructs is analyzed. Each indicator is modeled as a linear combination of its associated construct and an error term. With this estimation shown in Eqs. (1) and (2), it is modelled how well each indicator represents its construct. \(\:{X}_{i}=\:{\varLambda\:}_{i}{\xi\:}_{i}+\epsilon\:\:\:\:\:(\text{e}\text{x}\text{o}\text{g}\text{e}\text{n}\text{o}\text{u}\text{s}\:\text{c}\text{o}\text{n}\text{s}\text{t}\text{r}\text{u}\text{c}\text{t}\:{\xi\:}_{i}\) )(1) \(\:{X}_{j}=\:{\varLambda\:}_{j}{\xi\:}_{j}+\delta\:\:\:\:\:(\text{e}\text{n}\text{d}\text{o}\text{g}\text{e}\text{n}\text{o}\text{u}\text{s}\:\text{c}\text{o}\text{n}\text{s}\text{t}\text{r}\text{u}\text{c}\text{t}\:{\xi\:}_{j}\) )(2) where \(\:{\xi\:}_{j}\) is the vector of the endogenous constructs and \(\:{\xi\:}_{i}\) is the vector of the exogenous constructs and. \(\:{X}_{i}\) and \(\:{X}_{j}\) represent the related vectors of indicator ( \(\:{x}_{1},\dots\:,{x}_{i};{x}_{1},\dots\:,{x}_{j})\) of the exogenous construct \(\:{\xi\:}_{i}\) and endogenous construct \(\:{\xi\:}_{j}\) , respectively. Moreover, \(\:\:{\varLambda\:}_{i}\) and \(\:{\varLambda\:}_{j}\) reflect the matrices of the indicator loading ( \(\:{\lambda\:}_{1},\dots\:,\:{\lambda\:}_{k})\) with \(\:K\) as the number of indicators. The vectors of measurement errors for the indicators are represented as \(\:\epsilon\:\) and \(\:\delta\:\) (Chin, 1998 ). The evaluation of a reflective outer model in PLS-SEM includes assessing several key metrics: indicator reliability, internal consistency, convergent validity and discriminant validity. To evaluate indicator reliability, loadings (λ) of an indicator should exceed a threshold of 0.7. A loading higher than 0.7 suggests that more than 50% of the indicator's variance is accounted for. For internal consistency within the outer model, the composite reliability (CR) should surpass a threshold of 0.7, indicating that the indicators cohesively measure the same underlying construct. The average variance extracted (AVE) serves as the quality criterion for convergent validity and should be greater than a threshold of 0.5, suggesting that the construct explains over half of the variance of its indicators (Hair et al., 2022 ). Discriminant validity is assessed through Heterotrait-Monotrait (HTMT) correlations among the constructs, ensuring that each construct is distinct. The HTMT ratios should ideally not exceed a threshold of 0.9 to confirm discriminant validity (Hair et al., 2022 ; Henseler et al., 2015 ). Furthermore, a lack of discriminant validity can be excluded if a value of 1 does not fall in the 95% confidence intervals (Henseler et al. 2015 ). Lastly, variance inflation factors (VIFs) are calculated to address potential multicollinearity problems. VIFs should not exceed a threshold of 5. In contrast to reflective constructs where indicators are interchangeable, formative constructs consists of non-interchangeable indicators. Likewise, formative requires the that collinearity issues among the indicators are not present, which is checked via VIFs. Furthermore, the statistical significance of the indicators is checked via outer weights (γ). If one indicators weight is not statistically significant, the loading of the indicator should exceed 0.5. In the second phase of evaluating PLS-SEM, the inner model is estimated, which examines the relationships between exogenous and endogenous constructs using standardized path coefficients (β): $$\:{\xi\:}_{j}={\rm\:B}{\xi\:}_{j}+\:\varGamma\:{\xi\:}_{i}+\:\zeta\:$$ 3 Equation ( 3 ) delineates how endogenous constructs (as outcomes) and exogenous constructs (as predictors) interact. The path coefficient matrices, \(\:{\rm\:B}\) and \(\:\:\varGamma\:\) , represent these relationships. The \(\:{\rm\:B}\) matrix captures the causal effects between endogenous constructs, while the \(\:\varGamma\:\) matrix describes the effects of exogenous on endogenous constructs. Moreover, the model includes a residuals vector (ζ), indicating that the exogenous constructs do not completely account for the variance observed in the endogenous constructs. To validate the statistical significance of the path coefficients (β), a bootstrapping procedure with 10,000 subsamples is used, allowing for t-statistic estimates and also to estimate confidence intervals for the HTMT values. Additionally, the R 2 values for the target construct are calculated to assess the model's explanatory power. To account for possible non-linear relationships quadratic terms are added and the linear and non-linear model results are compared using the Bayesian information criterion (BIC) (Hair et al., 2022 ; 2023 ). For this analysis, SmartPLS 4 was employed to estimate the model parameters (Ringle et al., 2024 ). 4 Results and Discussion 4.1 Sample 1390 people followed the link to the survey and started it. From these, 144 usable records could be used for the analysis. The average age of participants is 50.07 years, with a standard deviation of 12.86 years and a considerable spread in ages, ranging from 24 to 77 years old. Gender distribution shows that only 9% of the participants are female. 28% of the participants have a university degree or a degree from a university of applied sciences. In addition, 75% of the participants identify themselves as farmers. Table 1: Descriptive sample statistics (N = 144) Variable Description Mean SD Min Max age Participants‘ age in years 50.07 12.86 24 77 gender 1, if the participant is female; otherwise 0 0.09 - 0 1 uni 1, if the participant has a university degree or a degree from a university of applied sciences; otherwise 0 0.28 - 0 1 agr 1, if the participant is a farmer; otherwise 0 0.75 - 0 1 SD = Standard deviation Figure 2 shows the relative membership length frequency in their agricultural marketing cooperatives. The slight majority of participants have been members for more than twenty years. Figure 3 shows the results regarding members' communication perceptions within the cooperative, their personal commitment to the cooperative and the cooperative's contribution to their personal or professional development. Communication within the cooperative : The majority of members rate communication positively. 44.44% rate it as "rather good" and 12.50% as "very good", totaling 56.94% positive ratings. 28.47% are neutral, while 14.59% rate it negatively (10.42% "rather bad" and 4.17% "very bad"). This suggests that while communication is generally perceived well, there is room for improvement. Personal commitment to the cooperative : Members show a high level of personal commitment. 25.69% rate their commitment as "very high" and 28.47% as "high", totaling 54.16% high commitment. 28.47% report medium commitment. Only 28.48% report low (18.06%) or very low (10.42%) commitment. This indicates strong member engagement overall. Contribution to personal or professional development : The cooperative appears to contribute significantly to members' development. 40.97% report it has contributed "rather a lot" and 11.11% "very much", totaling 52.08% positive impact. 27.08% are neutral ("neither"), while 20.84% report little (11.81%) or very little (9.03%) contribution. This suggests the cooperative provides valuable development opportunities for many members. 4.2 Model results Table 2 shows the results from the outer model assessment. Robustness, adaptability, transformability and the cooperatives values are reflective while the perceived resilience is formative in nature in accordance with Slijper et al. (2020). Variance inflation factors of all indicators range between 1.116 and 4.107, indicating that multi-collinearity is no threat to the model (Hair et al., 2022). The descriptive results from Table 2 offer insights into how members perceive various resilience aspects from their agricultural marketing cooperatives. In terms of robustness, members generally express high confidence in their cooperatives' ability to withstand challenges and maintain operations. This is particularly evident in their strong agreement with the statement "Our cooperative remains operational during market fluctuations and continuously ensures the supply and sale of our products" (rob1; mean = 4.38). Members also believe that their cooperatives contribute to sustainability in agriculture, even during difficult times (rob2; mean = 4.07), and have effective strategies to remain operational during crises (rob4; mean = 4.10). These high scores, all above 4 on a 5-point scale, suggest that members perceive their cooperatives as stable and resilient entities capable of weathering various challenges. This strong confidence in the cooperative's ability to remain operational and contribute to sustainability even in difficult times suggests that the cooperative model is seen as inherently stable. This perception could be an important asset for cooperatives, potentially aiding in member retention and recruitment. However, it also implies a responsibility for cooperative leadership to maintain this high level of robustness to meet member expectations. Regarding adaptability, members' perceptions are generally positive, albeit slightly less enthusiastic than for robustness. They agree that their cooperatives can effectively adapt their product range to changing market conditions (adapt1; mean = 3.85) and quickly adapt to market trends (adapt2; mean = 3.82). There's a slightly lower, but still positive, perception of the cooperatives' ability to swiftly integrate new technological developments (adapt3; mean = 3.72). Interestingly, members generally disagree with the statement "Our cooperative is not able to flexibly design its business strategies to respond to changes in the market environment" (adapt4; mean = 2.19), further supporting the overall adaptability perception. The adaptability scores, while positive, are slightly lower than those for robustness. This suggests that members perceive room for improvement in their cooperatives' ability to adapt to changing market conditions and integrate new technologies. The implication here is that cooperatives may need to focus on enhancing their adaptive capacities. Developing and communicating clear strategies for adaptation could help improve member perceptions in this area and their commitment. Transformability scores are consistently positive across all items, with means ranging from 3.85 to 3.89. Members perceive their cooperatives as open to extensive structural changes to maintain long-term market position (trans1; mean = 3.89) and willing to rethink their business models to pursue new market opportunities (trans2; mean = 3.85). Participants also agree that exploring new markets and expanding offerings are central to their cooperatives' growth strategies (trans3; mean = 3.85). Notably, members agree that their cooperatives are willing to adjust business processes for economic and ecological sustainability (trans4; mean = 3.89), indicating a forward-thinking approach to transformation. Transformability scores are consistently positive across all items, indicating that members view their cooperatives as open to substantial changes when necessary. This openness to transformation, including structural changes and new market exploration, suggests that cooperatives have a solid foundation for implementing large-scale changes if required. The implication is that cooperatives may be well-positioned to undertake major strategic shifts, should market conditions demand it. The cooperative values and principles are strongly endorsed by members, with high agreement across all statements. Members particularly agree that "The cooperative values and principles as a whole contribute to strengthening the resilience of our cooperative" (value1; mean = 3.85) and that adhering to these principles equips them better to overcome crises and challenges together (value2; mean = 3.92). There is also a strong agreement that their cooperative culture improves adaptability to changing conditions (value3; mean = 3.72) and that the sense of community fostered by these values is crucial for quick recovery from setbacks (value4; mean = 3.78). The high scores for cooperative values and principles imply that members strongly believe in the importance of these foundational elements to their cooperative's resilience. This suggests that cooperatives should continue to emphasize and reinforce these values in their operations and communications, especially when communicating potential resilience strategies. The factor loadings for most reflective indicators are well above the recommended threshold of 0.7 and statistically significant. The only exception is the reversed item in the adaptability construct (adapt4), which has a lower loading of 0.424. Following Hair et al. (2022), we retained apat4 as its loading exceeds 0.4 and is also statistically significant. Regarding the outer model results, all reflective constructs show high CR (CR > 0.7) and AVE (AVE > 0.5) values, indicating good internal consistency and convergent validity The resilience construct, being formative in nature, is measured by three distinct statements that capture different facets of perceived current and future resilience within agricultural marketing cooperatives. The first statement, "I think it's easy for our cooperative to deal with current challenges," yields a mean score of 3.40 on a 5-point Likert scale. This moderate level of agreement suggests that members generally believe their cooperative can handle current challenges, albeit with some difficulty. The second statement, "I think our cooperative is well positioned for current challenges," garners a higher level of agreement with a mean of 3.94. This indicates that members have relatively strong confidence in their cooperative's current positioning to face challenges, more so than in the ease of dealing with these challenges. Looking to the future, the third statement, "For the future, I believe our cooperative is very well positioned to master all future challenges," shows a mean of 3.83. This demonstrates a robust belief in the cooperative's future resilience, though slightly less than the confidence in current positioning. Regarding the formative resilience construct, the varying means across the three items provide interesting insights. The lower score for ease of dealing with current challenges (mean 3.40) compared to positioning for current and future challenges (means 3.94 and 3.83 respectively) implies that while members believe their cooperatives are well-positioned, they recognize that overcoming challenges is not always easy. This realistic assessment suggests that cooperatives should strive for transparency about the difficulties they face while also highlighting their strategies for overcoming these challenges. Regarding the validity of the formative construct, all three items show statistically significant weights 11 (0.405, 0.297, and 0.450 respectively). The weights, being all positive and statistically significant, suggest that each aspect uniquely contributes to the formation of the resilience construct. Notably, the future-oriented statement has the highest weight (0.450), implying that long-term resilience plays a particularly crucial role in a members' overall perception of cooperative resilience. Table 2 : Outer model assessment a Robustness (CR = 0.923; AVE = 0.749) b Mean c SD λ b γ rob1 Our cooperative remains operational during market fluctuations and continuously ensures the supply and sale of our products 4.38 0.77 0.841*** - rob2 Even in difficult times, our cooperative contributes to sustainability in agriculture 4.07 0.94 0.895*** - rob3 Our cooperative can cope well with an economic setback and recovers quickly from it 4.00 0.84 0.862*** - rob4 Our cooperative has effective strategies that ensure our cooperative remains operational even in times of crisis 4.10 0.95 0.864*** - Adaptability (CR = 0.866; AVE = 0.632) b adapt1 Our cooperative effectively adapts its product range to changing market conditions 3.85 0.90 0.880*** - adapt2 Our cooperative is able to adapt quickly to market trends and thus benefit from them 3.82 0.85 0.899*** - adapt3 New technological developments are swiftly integrated by our cooperative to improve efficiency and competitiveness 3.72 0.96 0.876*** - adapt4 Our cooperative is not able to flexibly design its business strategies to respond to changes in the market environment 2.19 1.02 0.424*** - Transformability (CR = 0.890; AVE = 0.670) b trans1 Our cooperative is open to extensive structural changes to maintain its position in the market in the long term 3.89 0.95 0.797*** - trans2 We are willing and able to rethink our business model to pursue new market opportunities 3.85 0.92 0.856*** - trans3 Exploring new markets and expanding our offerings are central components of our strategy for growth and diversification 3.85 0.98 0.812*** - trans4 Economically and ecologically sustainable practices are important to our cooperative, and we are willing to adjust our business processes accordingly to be future-proof 3.89 0.88 0.808*** - Cooperatives values and principles (CR = 0.946; AVE = 0.814) b value1 The cooperative values and principles as a whole contribute to strengthening the resilience of our cooperative 3.85 0.93 0.931*** - value2 By adhering to our cooperative values and principles, we are better equipped to overcome crises and challenges together 3.92 0.90 0.893*** - value3 Our cooperative culture, based on our shared values and principles, improves our adaptability to changing market and environmental conditions 3.72 0.91 0.885*** - value4 The strong sense of community and solidarity fostered by our cooperative values and principles are crucial for our ability to quickly recover from setbacks 3.78 1.01 0.900*** - Resilience d res1 I think it is easy for our cooperative to deal with current challenges 3.40 0.98 0.749*** 0.405*** res2 I think our cooperative is well positioned for current challenges 3.94 0.88 0.922*** 0.297*** res3 For the future, I believe our cooperative is very well positioned to master all future challenges 3.83 0.98 0.899*** 0.450*** a Rob = Robustness; Adapt = Adaptability; Trans = Transformability; Value = Cooperative values and principles; Res = Perceive Resilience; λ = Loading; γ = Weight; CR = Composite reliability; AVE = Average variance extracted; SD = Standard deviation b Cut-off level λ > 0.7; CR > 0.7; AVE > 0.5 c Statements were evaluated using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = high disagreement; 5 = high agreement) d For a formative construct, CR and AVE are not given and factor weights in addition to loadings are provided. ***p < 0.001; **p < 0.01; *p < 0.5 Table 3 shows the results for the HTMT criterion. All HTMT ratios are below 0.9 and their confidence intervals does not include the value of 1, which confirms sufficient discriminant validity. The assessment of the HTMT values confirms the validity and consistency of the outer model and one can proceed with the inner model assessment. Table 3: HTMT results (N = 144) Adaptability Cooperatives values and principles Robustness Cooperatives values and principles 0.737 [0.611;0.839] Robustness 0.871 [0.787;0.933] 0.754 [0.650;0.837] Transformability 0.894 [0.813;0.966] 0.760 [0.649;0.849] 0.835 [0.749;0.903] Cut-off level HTMT > 0.9. In square brackets the 95% bootstrap confidence intervals of the HTMT estimates are shown (10,000 subsamples) Table 4 shows the inner model results. We compared the basic model of perceived resilience based on Slijper et al. (2020) with the extended model which adds cooperatives values and principles as an individual own resilience capacity. In the lower part of Table 4, values for BIC and adj. R 2 values are given. Following Danks et al. (2010) the improvement in BIC and adj. R 2 supports the use of the extended model. In the next step, a linear extended model is compared with a non-linear extended model, with the latter including quadratic interaction effects of each predictive construct. The non-linear model is favored by the adj. R 2 values, while the BIC value supports the use of the linear model. However, as the increase in adj. R 2 is only small, and the BIC value support the use of the linear extended model, we proceed with the analysis of linear extended model. The chosen linear extended model explains 63.30% of the variation of the perceived resilience of the agricultural marketing cooperatives. In the extended linear model, all four hypothesized relationships (H1-H4) show statistical significance, each contributing uniquely to the resilience perception among cooperative members. Hence, higher levels of robustness, adaptability, transformability as well as valuation of cooperative values and principles can lead to higher and improved resilience, which is line with the literature (e.g. Darnhofer, 2014; Meuwissen et al., 2019; Slijper et al., 2020) and also confirms the hypotheses. Robustness ( H1 ) exhibits a positive effect on perceived resilience (β = 0.195 [0.044;0.336]), indicating that members' confidence in their cooperative's ability to withstand external disturbances contributes to overall resilience perceptions. This relationship suggests that members view their cooperative's ability to absorb shocks and maintain core functions as an important foundation for (future) resilience. The positive influence reflects confidence in the cooperative's capacity to remain operational even in challenging times. However, the relatively lower coefficient compared to other factors indicates that while robustness is crucial, it may be seen as a necessary but not sufficient condition for future resilience. Adaptability ( H2 ) also positively influences perceived resilience (β = 0.217 [0.034;0.421]), suggesting that the cooperative's capacity to adapt to changing market conditions and technologies is a crucial factor for members' assessing (future) resilience. Members appear to recognize that higher adaptive capacity is crucial for navigating an increasingly dynamic agricultural sector. Transformability ( H3 ) shows a positive relationship with perceived resilience (β = 0.218 [-0.009;0.418]), implying that members' belief in their cooperative's ability to implement comprehensive changes enhances their resilience perception. For agricultural marketing cooperatives, this capacity might involve noteworthy shifts in business models, such as moving into value-added processing or exploring new ventures. Notably, the construct of cooperative values and principles ( H4 ) demonstrates the strongest positive effect on perceived resilience (β = 0.282 [0.147;0.420]). The stronger the adherence to cooperative values and principles, the higher the perceived future resilience. This relationship emphasizes that members view the adherence to cooperative principles as a critical capacity for facing future challenges. The higher coefficient suggests that members believe the sense of community, democratic control and shared responsibility inherent in the cooperative model, will be particularly valuable in adapting to and overcoming (future) obstacles. The hierarchy of influences (cooperative values > transformability ≈ adaptability > robustness) provides important insights into how members prioritize different capacities for future resilience. While all capacities are statistically significant, the stronger influence of cooperative values suggests that members view this as the most crucial capacity for future challenges. The similar coefficients for adaptability and transformability indicate that members see both incremental and radical change capabilities as equally important for (future) resilience. While the non-linear model was not selected for final interpretation due to its higher BIC value and only marginal increase in R² adj., it presents an intriguing finding regarding transformability. The negative path coefficient for the quadratic term of transformability (Trans 2 ) in the non-linear model suggests a potential curvilinear relationship. This could indicate that while some degree of transformability enhances perceived resilience, excessive transformation might actually decrease it. One could suggest, this could be due to a loss of identity, making it difficult for members to identify with a rapidly or dramatically changing agricultural marketing cooperative. This finding, although not part of our main model, highlights the delicate balance agricultural marketing cooperatives must strike between adaptability and maintaining their core identity. Table 4: Inner model results (N = 144) Basic model Extended model Linear Model Linear Model Non-linear model H β t-value a β t-value a β t-value a Rob à Res H1 0.294** [0.139;0.442] 3.182 0.195* [0.044;0.336] 2.197 0.240*** [0.063;0.397] 2.377 Adapt à Res H2 0.266* [0.075;0.468] 2.222 0.217* [0.034;0.421] 1.842 0.250** [0.054;0.456] 2.041 Trans à Res H3 0.298* [0.077;0.497] 2.341 0.218* [-0.009;0.418] 1.685 0.147 [-0.096;0.365] 1.039 Value à Res H4 0.282*** [0.147;0.420] 3.380 0.300** [0.161;0.456] 3.359 Rob 2 à Res 0.042 [-0.042;0.115] 0.873 Adapt 2 à Res 0.049 [-0.053;0.164] 0.748 Trans 2 à Res -0.105 [-0.225;0.016] 1.425 Value 2 à Res 0.004 [-0.061;0.089] 0.047 BIC -115.61 -124.63 -109.32 R 2 adj. 0.599 0.633 0.655 Rob = Robustness; Adapt = Adaptability; Trans = Transformability; Value = Cooperative values and principles; Res = Perceive Resilience; adj = adjusted a Bootstrapping result with 10,000 sub-samples ***p<0.001; **p<0.01; *p<0.05 In conclusion, these results highlight that members perceive future resilience as a function of multiple, interconnected capacities. While the ability to absorb shocks (robustness) is important, members place greater emphasis on capacities that allow for adaptation and transformation. Most notably, they view the cooperative model itself, with its inherent values and principles, as the strongest capacity for navigating future challenges. Based on the model results, we can derive several key implications for different stakeholders in the agricultural cooperative sector. For members, the findings emphasize the critical role of cooperative principles in resilience. Members should recognize that their active participation and adherence to cooperative values contribute to the organization's resilience. This understanding should encourage them to engage more deeply in cooperative activities, including decision-making processes and collaborative initiatives (Figure 2). Executives of agricultural marketing cooperatives should prioritize and reinforce the communication on how cooperative values are reflected in their management strategies, given their strong impact on perceived resilience. For instance, cooperative values can guide decisions on market expansion, ensuring that new ventures align with the organization's commitment to community impact and sustainability. This finding is also important for cooperatives beyond agricultural marketing cooperatives with high membership value. It suggests that in these organizations, the cooperative model itself is seen as a crucial resilience capacity. In addition, they should develop balanced resilience strategies that maintain robustness while equally investing in improving the cooperative's adaptability and transformability. In other words, by cultivating these capacities and strongly adhering to cooperative principles, these organizations can build member confidence in their ability to successfully navigate and thrive amidst future challenges in the agricultural sector. This interaction between general resilience capacities and organization-specific characteristics may be relevant for understanding resilience in other types of organizations, particularly those with strong value-based cultures or democratic governance structures. Researchers have several avenues for further investigation based on these findings. They should explore how specific (cooperative) values and principles contribute to perceived resilience in different contexts and examine the interplay between robustness, adaptability and transformability, and how these interact with these values and principles in various scenarios. 4.3 Limitations While this study provides valuable insights into the perceived resilience of agricultural marketing cooperatives, it is important to acknowledge several limitations. Firstly, the sample size with 144 usable responses is relatively small. For futures studies, a larger sample size could be beneficial. Secondly, the study relies on self-reported perceptions from cooperative members. While these perceptions are valuable, future research could benefit from incorporating objective measures of cooperative performance and resilience alongside member perceptions. Thirdly, the cross-sectional nature of the study provides a snapshot of member perceptions at a single point in time. Resilience, however, is a dynamic concept that may change over time in response to various internal and external factors. Longitudinal studies could offer more robust insights into how resilience perceptions evolve and how they relate to actual cooperative performance over time. 5 Concluding Remarks This study provides valuable insights into the factors influencing perceived resilience in agricultural marketing cooperatives in Germany. By examining the roles of robustness, adaptability, transformability and cooperative values and principles, we have shed light on the complex dynamics that shape members' perceptions of their cooperatives' ability to withstand challenges and thrive in an ever-changing agricultural landscape. Our findings underscore the multifaceted nature of perceived resilience in agricultural marketing cooperatives. While all examined factors contribute statistically significantly to perceived resilience, the strong influence of cooperative values and principles stands out as a key insight. This suggests that the unique characteristics of the cooperative model itself play a crucial role in building members' confidence in their organization's resilience. The positive relationships between robustness, adaptability and transformability with perceived resilience highlight the importance of developing a balanced approach to resilience-building in cooperatives. Members value not only their cooperative's ability to withstand shocks (robustness) but also its capacity to adapt to changing conditions (adaptability) and fundamentally transform when necessary (transformability). This balanced perspective suggests that cooperative leaders should focus on enhancing all these capacities to boost member confidence in their organization's resilience. Particularly noteworthy is the paramount role of cooperative values and principles in shaping perceived resilience. This finding underscores the importance of maintaining and reinforcing these foundational elements of the cooperative model. It suggests that adhering to principles such as democratic member control, member economic participation and concern for community not only defines the cooperative's identity but also contributes to its perceived resilience. By leveraging their unique strengths, particularly their foundational values and principles, these cooperatives can build on their members' confidence to navigate future challenges successfully. This not only benefits the cooperatives and their members but also contributes to the overall resilience and sustainability of the agricultural sector. Declarations Ethic approval was obtained by the German Association for Experimental Economic Research e.V. Prior to data collection, all participants received a brief introduction to the research and its objectives. They were informed about participation conditions and data protection provisions, which required their active consent. Acknowledgments We would like to thank the Raiffeisen Stiftung for its financial support and Marion Danneboom for her ongoing support with this project. We would also like to thank the interviewees and all participants in the survey. References Adams, I., Roth, M., & Doluschitz, R. (2016). Neue Geschäftsfelder für Genossenschaften: Chancen, Grenzen und Perspektiven in Baden-Württemberg. Zeitschrift für das gesamte Genossenschaftswesen , 66 (2), 127-143.DOI: 10.1515/zfgg-2016-0013 Balk, A., & Schaffhauser-Linzatti, M. (2021). Genossenschaften in Zeiten von Krisen-Die Sichtweise von GenossenschaftexpertInnen und-mitgliedern auf die Corona-Krise. Zeitschrift für das gesamte Genossenschaftswesen , 71 (3), 168-191. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfgg-2021-0011 Bardsley, D. K., & Bardsley, A. M. (2014). Organising for socio-ecological resilience: The roles of the mountain farmer cooperative Genossenschaft Gran Alpin in Graubünden, Switzerland. Ecological Economics , 98 , 11-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.12.004 Bijman, J., Iliopoulos, C., Poppe, K. J., Gijselinckx, C., Hagedorn, K., Hanisch, M., Hendrikse, G. W. J., Kühl, R., Ollila, P., Pyykkönen, P., & van der Sangen, G. (2012). Support for Farmers' Cooperatives : executive summary . Wageningen UR. https://edepot.wur.nl/245007 Billiet, A., Dufays, F., Friedel, S., & Staessens, M. (2021). The resilience of the cooperative model: How do cooperatives deal with the COVID‐19 crisis?. Strategic Change , 30 (2), 99-108. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsc.2393 Birchall, J., & Ketilson, L. H. (2009). Resilience of the cooperative business model in times of crisis . International Labour Organisation. Boehlje, M., Akridge, J., & Downey, D. (1995). Restructuring agribusiness for the 21st century. Agribusiness , 11 (6), 493-500. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6297(199511/12)11:6%3C493::AID-AGR2720110602%3E3.0.CO;2-G Borda‐Rodriguez, A., Johnson, H., Shaw, L., & Vicari, S. (2016). What makes rural co‐operatives resilient in developing countries?. Journal of International Development , 28 (1), 89-111. https://doi.org/10.1002/jid.3125 Borda-Rodriguez, A., & Vicari, S. (2014). Rural co-operative resilience: the case of Malawi. Journal of Co-operative Organization and Management , 2 (1), 43-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcom.2014.03.002 Chin, W. W. (1998) The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modeling. In: Marcoulides G. A. (eds.). Modern methods for business research. Mahwah, NJ, London: Lawrence Erlbaum; Taylor & Francis e-Library, p. 295–358 Danks, N. P., Sharma, P. N., & Sarstedt, M. (2020). Model selection uncertainty and multimodel inference in partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Journal of Business Research , 113 , 13-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.03.019 Darnhofer, I. (2014). Resilience and why it matters for farm management. European Review of Agricultural Economics , 41 (3), 461-484. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbu012 Davies, W. (2009). Reinventing the firm . Demos. http://www.demos.co.uk/publications/reinventing-the-firm Elsen, S. (2022). Die Bedeutung von Genossenschaften für die öko-soziale Transformation unter Berücksichtigung neuer Entwicklungen in Italien und Deutschland. Z'GuG Zeitschrift für Gemeinwirtschaft und Gemeinwohl , 45 (4), 595-615. DOI: 10.5771/2701-4193-2022-4-595 European Commission (2020): Communication from the Commission of the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. A Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system COM/2020/381 final. Online available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0381. Feindt, P. H., Meuwissen, M., Balmann, A., Finger, R., Mathijs, E., Paas, W., ... & Reidsma, P. (2022). Understanding and addressing the resilience crisis of Europe’s farming systems. In: Meuwissen et al. (eds.), Resilient and Sustainable Farming Systems in Europe. Cambridge University Press, pp. 342-374. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/9781009093569.021 Folke, C., Carpenter, S. R., Walker, B., Scheffer, M., Chapin, T., & Rockström, J. (2010). Resilience thinking: integrating resilience, adaptability and transformability. Ecology and society , 15 (4). Gollisch, S., & Theuvsen, L. (2018). Risikomanagement im Landhandel: Charakteristika, Herausforderungen, Implikationen. Berichte über Landwirtschaft – Zeitschrift für Landwirtschaft und Agrarpolitik , 93 (1). https://doi.org/10.12767/buel.v93i1.72 Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C.M. & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC, Melbourne: SAGE. Hair, J. F., Hair, J., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Gudergan, S. P. (2023). Advanced issues in partial least squares structural equation modeling. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC, Melbourne: SAGE. Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing theory and Practice, 19 (2), 139-152. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202 Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L., & Kuppelwieser, V. G. (2014). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): An emerging tool in business research. European business review, 26 (2), 106-121. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-10-2013-0128 Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Mena, J. A. (2012). An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 40 , 414-433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-011-0261-6 Hanf, J., & Kühl, R. (2005). Raiffeisen-Genossenschaften in einem sich wandelnden Agri-Food Business-noch eine Zukunft?. Zeitschrift für das gesamte Genossenschaftswesen , 55 (1), 210-223. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfgg-2005-0128 Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 43 , 115-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8 Hill, S., & Doluschitz, R. (2014). Genossenschaftliche Werte–Kern der genossenschaftlichen Identität?. Zeitschrift für das gesamte Genossenschaftswesen , 64 (1), 19-30. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfgg-2014-0103 Holling, C. S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 4 (1), 1-23. International Cooperative Alliance. What is a cooperative. Online available at: https://ica.coop/en, letzter Abruf 14.08.2024. Kühl, R., & Hanf, C. H. (1985). Der Landwarenhandel in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland: Struktur, Entwicklung, Analyse. Lampel, J., Bhalla, A., & Jha, P. P. (2014). Does governance confer organisational resilience? Evidence from UK employee owned businesses. European Management Journal , 32 (1), 66-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2013.06.009 Meuwissen, M. P., Feindt, P. H., Spiegel, A., Termeer, C. J., Mathijs, E., De Mey, Y., ... & Reidsma, P. (2019). A framework to assess the resilience of farming systems. Agricultural Systems , 176 , 102656. Meuwissen, M. P., Feindt, P. H., Garrido, A., Mathijs, E., Soriano, B., Urquhart, J., & Spiegel, A. (Eds.). (2022). Resilient and sustainable farming systems in Europe: exploring diversity and pathways . Cambridge University Press. Nicholas-Davies, P., Fowler, S., Midmore, P., Coopmans, I., Draganova, M., Petitt, A., & Senni, S. (2021). Evidence of resilience capacity in farmers’ narratives: Accounts of robustness, adaptability and transformability across five different European farming systems. Journal of Rural Studies , 88 , 388-399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.07.027 Nüssel, M. (2013). Genossenschaften–Unternehmensform zur Förderung einer nachhaltigen Agrarentwicklung. Zeitschrift für das gesamte Genossenschaftswesen , 63 (2), 127-140. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfgg-2013-0205 Prat-Benhamou, A., Bernués, A., Gaspar, P., Lizarralde, J., Mancilla-Leytón, J. M., Mandaluniz, N., ... & Martín-Collado, D. (2024). How do farm and farmer attributes explain perceived resilience?. Agricultural Systems , 219 , 104016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104016 Perrin, A., Milestad, R., & Martin, G. (2020). Resilience applied to farming: organic farmers' perspectives. Ecology and Society , 25 (4). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-11897-250405 Rai, S. S., Rai, S., & Singh, N. K. (2021). Organizational resilience and social-economic sustainability: COVID-19 perspective. Environment, Development and Sustainability , 23 , 12006-12023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-01154-6 Ringle, G. (2012). Kommunikationsmanagement im Mitgliedergeschäft von Genossenschaften. Zeitschrift für das gesamte Genossenschaftswesen , 62 (1), 3-18. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfgg-2012-0102 Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J.-M. (2024). SmartPLS 4 . Bönningstedt: SmartPLS. Online available at: https://www.smartpls.com Rosman, A., MacPherson, J., Arndt, M., & Helming, K. (2024). Perceived resilience of community supported agriculture in Germany. Agricultural Systems , 220 , 104068. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104068 Schmale, I. (2020). Nachhaltigkeit von und durch Genossenschaften. Handbuch Genossenschaftswesen , 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-18639-5_47-1#DOI Schulze, B. (2012). Herausforderungen des Landhandels unter veränderten Marktbedingungen: theoretische Überlegungen und empirische Evidenz. Paper presented at the 52 nd Annual Conference of the German Association of Agricultural Economists (GeWiSoLa). http://dx.doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.133053 Slijper, T., de Mey, Y., Poortvliet, P. M., & Meuwissen, M. P. (2020). From risk behavior to perceived farm resilience: a Dutch case study. Ecology and Society , 25 (4). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-11893-250410 Soriano, B., Garrido, A., Bertolozzi-Caredio, D., Accatino, F., Antonioli, F., Krupin, V., ... & Bardají, I. (2023). Actors and their roles for improving resilience of farming systems in Europe. Journal of Rural Studies , 98 , 134-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2023.02.003 Stappel, M. (2023). Die deutschen Genossenschaften 2023 Entwicklungen – Meinungen – Zahlen. Online available at: https://www.dg-medienportal.de/dg-portal/xhtml/detail.jsf?docId=neuerscheinung_1161, last checked 28.08.2024. Steiner, G., & Schütt, A. (2011). „Vertrauen in Deutschland “und genossenschaftliche Werte. Zeitschrift für das gesamte Genossenschaftswesen , 61 (3), 201-216. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfgg-2011-0304 Spiegel, A., Slijper, T., de Mey, Y., Meuwissen, M. P., Poortvliet, P. M., Rommel, J., ... & Feindt, P. H. (2021). Resilience capacities as perceived by European farmers. Agricultural Systems , 193 , 103224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2021.103224 Tse, Y. K., Zhang, M., Zeng, W., & Ma, J. (2021). Perception of supply chain quality risk: Understanding the moderation role of supply market thinness. Journal of Business Research , 122 , 822-834. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.07.003 Walker, B., Holling, C. S., Carpenter, S. R., & Kinzig, A. (2004). Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social–ecological systems. Ecology and society , 9 (2). https://www.jstor.org/stable/26267673 Williams, T. A., Gruber, D. A., Sutcliffe, K. M., Shepherd, D. A., & Zhao, E. Y. (2017). Organizational response to adversity: Fusing crisis management and resilience research streams. Academy of management annals , 11 (2), 733-769. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2015.0134 Zhao, G., Liu, S., & Lopez, C. (2017). A literature review on risk sources and resilience factors in agri-food supply chains. In Collaboration in a Data-Rich World: 18th IFIP WG 5.5 Working Conference on Virtual Enterprises, PRO-VE 2017, Vicenza, Italy, September 18-20, 2017, Proceedings 18 (pp. 739-752). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65151-4_66 Footnotes The term resilience can be traced back to a seminal paper from Holling ( 1973 ). It should be noted that the literature already provided results regarding the cooperative organizational resilience which also highlight membership as part of the resilience contributing factors (e.g. Borda-Rodriguez and Vicari, 2014 ; Borda-Rodriguez et al., 2016 ). However, these do not focus on member perceptions. It should be mentioned that the term is not new to agricultural researchers or economists (e.g. Darnhofer, 2014 ). Further results can be found in Spiegel et al. ( 2021 ), Nicholas-Davies (2021), Soriano et al. ( 2023 ), Rosman (2024) or in Prat-Benhamou et al. ( 2024 ). Cooperatively organized agricultural trade In 2024, there were 1,859 cooperatives with 381,000 members (Stappel, 2023 ). It should be noted that the concept of resilience is not new to agribusiness. Boehlje et al. ( 1995 , p. 493) describe: “Change is not new to the that industry […]. These changes are driven by changes in food consumer needs, wants and attitudes; new technological advances at all levels; increasing governmental regulations; and changes at the farm production level. […]. Awareness of these changes, these new directions […] is critical for strategic positioning and planning.” Bardsley and Bardsley ( 2014 ) provide evidence that cooperatives can contribute to farm system resilience. Results from the qualitative interviews are not shown here. The members who were also active farmers were also asked to provide information about their farm. For example, they were asked about the arable and grassland areas they have. The results are not shown. The variance in weights also supports the formative nature of the construct, as it indicates that the items are not interchangeable and each captures a unique aspect of resilience. Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7303760","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":496203290,"identity":"e66b2078-fa07-4c73-b956-5b48f73ef0ee","order_by":0,"name":"Marius Michels","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4391-4457","institution":"Georg-August-Universität Göttingen","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Marius","middleName":"","lastName":"Michels","suffix":""},{"id":496203291,"identity":"ef5a8cec-6c1c-4bd0-85ab-b6188f6b466c","order_by":1,"name":"Lorenz Schmidt","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Humboldt University of Berlin","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Lorenz","middleName":"","lastName":"Schmidt","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-08-05 20:03:59","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":true,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":true,"humanSubjectConsent":true,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7303760/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7303760/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":88752290,"identity":"11ea094b-89b8-4438-9c60-461d93f95d2a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-11 06:31:46","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":82746,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConceptual framework for assessing perceived resilience in agricultural marketing cooperatives. The diagram illustrates the hypothesized relationships between robustness, adaptability, transformability and cooperative values and principles as predictors of perceived resilience.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7303760/v1/f77973bd135b44af5ec9b97b.png"},{"id":88752291,"identity":"eb6d68f0-e2df-44e3-a767-3d189c326d61","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-11 06:31:46","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":56416,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDistribution of cooperative membership duration. The pie chart illustrates the percentage of members belonging to different tenure categories, ranging from 0-5 years to longer than 25 years’ membership. (N = 144)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7303760/v1/5f3f9306013e16876e3a68e7.png"},{"id":88752842,"identity":"22438d18-fb55-4574-b093-1756db56ba33","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-11 06:39:46","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":69849,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMember perceptions of cooperative communication, personal commitment and developmental impact. The bar charts illustrate (top left) how members rate internal communication within the cooperative, (top right) their level of personal commitment to the cooperative and (bottom) the extent to which cooperative membership has contributed to their personal or professional development. Data shown as percentages of respondents for each category. (N = 144)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7303760/v1/b9f2199ef15a198a6d09a4f9.png"},{"id":88753144,"identity":"56834371-cf2b-410f-be26-b01c3e590920","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-11 06:47:47","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1393421,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7303760/v1/87f38591-3553-49a7-b6e2-d7e68baa1f22.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePerception of Resilience: A Member's Perspective on German Agricultural Marketing Cooperatives\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"1 Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eWalker et al. (2004, p. 4) define resilience\u003ca href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\" title=\"\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e as the \u0026ldquo;the capacity of a system to absorb disturbance and reorganize while undergoing change so as to still retain essentially the same function, structure and feedbacks\u0026rdquo;. Resilience is a term that appears again and again in scientific and political debates. The popularity of this concept stems from political and economic volatility and uncertainty (Darnhofer, 2014). Resilience plays a crucial role for the survival and continued existence of companies and organizations (e.g. Lampel et al., 2014; Rai et al., 2021). While resilience is crucial for all organizations, it takes on particular meaning in the cooperative context due their unique organizational form and ownership. For instance, Davis (2009) argue that the relationship between membership and governance can play a part in reducing resilience for short-term financial benefits.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCooperatives, as value-oriented organizations owned by their members (Hill and Doluschitz, 2014; Billiet et al., 2021) uniquely combine economic viability, social responsibility and long-term sustainability (N\u0026uuml;ssel, 2013; Schmale, 2020). The cooperative values and principles form the basis of the cooperative identity, regardless of the economic sector in which the cooperative operates (Hill and Doluschitz, 2014). The cooperative business model has been attributed as being more resilient than other organizational forms especially in times of crises and shocks (Birchall and Ketilson, 2009; Adams et al., 2016; Balk and Schaffhaus-Linzatti, 2021; Elsen, 2022). Borda-Rodriguez and Vicari (2014) as well as Billiet et al. (2021) highlight that membership and the centrality of members in cooperatives notably contribute to the cooperatives\u0026rsquo; resilience. Member resilience perceptions are crucial in the cooperative context, as they can influence participation, loyalty and overall cooperative performance. However, and to the best of our knowledge, a cooperative\u0026rsquo;s resilience has not yet been explored from a members\u0026rsquo; point of view\u003ca href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\" title=\"\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e..\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWith the European Commission (2020) calling for strengthening the Europeans\u0026rsquo; food system\u0026rsquo;s resilience, the term resilience received a lot of attention from agricultural researchers\u003ca href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\" title=\"\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e as a result. Farmers face multiple challenges such as climate change and need to adapt and transform to cope with these challenges which highlights the need for a resilient agri-food system (Feindt et al., 2022). While much research has focused on the agricultural system\u0026rsquo;s resilience (e.g. Meuwissen et al., 2022), less attention has been paid to key stakeholder\u0026rsquo;s perceptions, despite notable exceptions such as Perrin et al. (2020), and these studies mostly focus on only one resilience capacity (Spiegel et al., 2021). Based on the framework by Meuwissen et al. (2019), recent studies have begun exploring multiple resilience capacities. For instance, Slijper et al. (2020) explored how risk capacities are related to perceived resilience based on a survey with Dutch farmers applying structural equation modelling (SEM). They found that high perceived resilience capacities lead to higher perceived resilience\u003ca href=\"#_ftn4\" name=\"_ftnref4\" title=\"\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003csup\u003e4\u003c/sup\u003e. Within these agricultural systems, agricultural marketing cooperatives\u003ca href=\"#_ftn5\" name=\"_ftnref5\" title=\"\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003csup\u003e5\u003c/sup\u003e play an enormous role as an interface between the farms and the factor as well as product markets (K\u0026uuml;hl and Hanf, 1985), which ensures the farms functionality through its supply of inputs and purchase of outputs as well as other services such as consulting (Hanf and K\u0026uuml;hl, 2005; Schulze, 2012; Gollisch and Theuvsen, 2015). However, and to the best of our knowledge, agricultural marketing cooperative\u0026rsquo;s members \u003ca href=\"#_ftn6\" name=\"_ftnref6\" title=\"\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003csup\u003e6\u003c/sup\u003e have not been in the focus of (perceived) resilience research yet given the important role of agricultural marketing cooperatives in the agricultural and food systems (e.g. Hanf and K\u0026uuml;hl, 2005) and the importance of members in cooperatives (Billiet et al., 2021). Therefore, this study aims to examine the factors influencing perceived member\u0026rsquo;s resilience in German agricultural marketing cooperatives\u003ca href=\"#_ftn7\" name=\"_ftnref7\" title=\"\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003csup\u003e7\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBy addressing the two identified research gaps, we aim to contribute to the growing literature body on (agricultural) resilience while providing practical insights for cooperative management. Drawing on the framework developed by Meuwissen et al. (2019) and adapted by Slijper et al. (2020), this study investigates how resilience capacities robustness, adaptability and transformability contribute to perceived resilience. Additionally, recognizing the unique nature of cooperatives, we extend this framework to include cooperative values and principles as a potential factor influencing perceived resilience. For this purpose, this study employs a quantitative approach, using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) to analyze survey data collected from 144 German agricultural marketing cooperative\u0026rsquo;s members in 2024. This methodological approach allows us to examine the relationships between different resilience capacities and perceived resilience while accounting for the unique characteristics of cooperative organizations. By investigating the factors that shape perceived resilience in agricultural marketing cooperatives, this study aims to provide valuable insights for cooperative leaders, members and researchers. With cooperatives accounting for 40% of the agricultural market share in the European Union, understanding these dynamics can help develop strategies to strengthen the resilience and ultimately contributing to the sustainability of the broader agricultural sector (Bijman, 2012).\u003ca href=\"#_ftn8\" name=\"_ftnref8\" title=\"\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003csup\u003e8\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, this study makes several unique contributions to the literature. First, it extends the framework of Meuwissen et al. (2019) by incorporating cooperative values and principles as a potential factor influencing perceived resilience, thus adapting the model specifically to the cooperative context. Second, it focuses on members\u0026apos; perceptions of resilience in agricultural marketing cooperatives, an area that has been largely overlooked in previous research. Finally, by examining the interplay between traditional resilience capacities (robustness, adaptability, transformability) and cooperative values and principles, this study provides insights into how organizational structure and governance impact stakeholder perceptions of resilience, extending its relevance beyond the agricultural sector to broader organizational and economic context. In detail, by incorporating cooperative values and principles as a key factor in perceived resilience, we contribute to the broader understanding of how organizational structure and governance impact stakeholder perceptions and organizational resilience.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe remainder of this article reads as follows: In the next section the conceptual framework to assess predictors of perceived resilience is presented. In the third section, the survey, data collection as well as the estimation techniques is described. Results are presented and discussed in the fourth section. Furthermore, limitations of this study are stated. The article ends with some concluding remarks.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2\tConceptual Framework","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe conceptual framework for this study is grounded in understanding the resilience within agricultural systems (Meuwissen et al., 2019), with a specific focus on the adaptation to agricultural marketing cooperatives. Resilience in agricultural systems refers to these system\u0026rsquo;s capacity to absorb disturbances, to reorganize and to continue functioning when change arises. The resilience concept in agriculture encompasses three key resilience capacities: robustness, adaptability and transformability (Meuwissen et al., 2019).\u0026nbsp;Agricultural marketing cooperatives represent the cooperatively organized agricultural trade (Hanf and K\u0026uuml;hl, 2005) and\u0026nbsp;play a vital role in the agricultural sector by giving farmers access to sales and supply markets and providing advisory services (Schulze, 2012; Gollisch and Theuvsen, 2015). As part of the supply chains in the food systems, these agricultural marketing cooperatives like farms face several challenges, experience volatilities and uncertain business environments (Zhao et al., 2017; Tse et al., 2021). Cooperative organizations, like agricultural marketing cooperatives, have a unique characteristic in terms of their shared cooperative values and principles (Hill and Doluschitz, 2014) and high membership valuation (Ringle, 2012).\u0026nbsp;Recognizing these unique characteristics is crucial for developing a comprehensive framework of perceived resilience in (agricultural marketing) cooperatives.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBased on the framework by Meuwissen et al. (2019), robustness, in the context of agricultural marketing cooperatives, refers to the ability of these organizations to withstand shocks and continue functioning without substantial changes to their structure or operations. Adaptability, on the other hand, relates to the cooperative\u0026apos;s capacity to adjust its strategies, products or services in response to changing conditions. This might involve adopting new technologies, exploring new market opportunities or modifying organizational processes. Transformability represents the most profound level of change, involving the cooperative\u0026rsquo;s ability to fundamentally alter its structure or function when existing conditions become untenable. This could include major shifts in business models or entering entirely new markets. Cooperative values and principles, such as democratic member control, member economic participation and concern for community, form the foundation of the cooperative model (Steiner and Sch\u0026uuml;tt, 2011; Hill and Doluschitz, 2014). The shared cooperative values and principles (e.g. solidarity) contribute to the formation of social capital (e.g. bonds/relationships between members), which contributes to resilience (Williams et al., 2017). Cooperative values and principles can therefore be understood as a resilience capacity. Hence, the perceived adherence or valuation of these values may play an important role in shaping agricultural marketing cooperative\u0026rsquo;s perceived resilience. For instance, the principle of member economic participation could contribute to financial robustness, while democratic member control might enhance adaptability through diverse decision-making inputs. Perceived resilience for members in agricultural marketing cooperatives in line with Spiegel et al. (2021), refers to members\u0026apos; subjective assessment of their cooperative\u0026apos;s ability to withstand, adapt to and recover from challenges. Hence, all three resilience capacities as well as the cooperatives values principles jointly shape\u0026rsquo; members perception of (future) resilience. Therefore, in line with Slijper et al. (2020) and Williams et al. (2017), it can be expected that higher perceived robustness, adaptability and transformability are related to higher perceived (future) agricultural marketing cooperative\u0026rsquo;s resilience. Likewise, adhering to and supporting cooperative values and principles are related to higher perceived resilience. Based on this conceptual framework, we propose four hypotheses:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eH1: Robustness has a statistically significant positive effect on perceived resilience in agricultural marketing cooperatives.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eH2: Adaptability has a statistically significant positive effect on perceived resilience in agricultural marketing cooperatives.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eH3: Transformability has a statistically significant positive effect on perceived resilience in agricultural marketing cooperatives.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eH4: Adherence to and support of cooperative values and principles has a statistically significant positive effect on perceived resilience in agricultural marketing cooperatives.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThese hypotheses are visually represented in the conceptual model presented in Figure 1. The model illustrates the proposed relationships between the three resilience capacities (robustness, adaptability and transformability) as well as cooperative values and principles as predictors of perceived resilience.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"3 Material and Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.1 Survey design and data collection\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe standardized online survey can be divided into four parts, whereby only the first three parts are relevant for this article. In the first part, the participants were asked to rate several statements regarding the resilience capacities as well as cooperatives values and principles on a 5-point Likert scale (1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;high disagreement; 5\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;high agreement). The following term descriptions were given to the participants beforehand. By providing a short description, we ensured that all participants have the same understanding of these terms for evaluating the statements. The descriptions of the resilience capacity terms were based on Meuwissen et al. (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e), Slijper et al. (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), Spiegel et al. (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) as well as 18 qualitative semi-structured interviews with executives from agricultural\u003c/p\u003emarketing cooperatives\u003ca href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\" title=\"\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003csup\u003e9\u003c/sup\u003e, \u0026nbsp;which were conducted before the online survey. The description of the cooperative values and principles is based on the Internal Cooperative Alliance, Steiner and Sch\u0026uuml;tt (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e) as well as Birchall and Ketilson (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e).\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRobustness\u003c/em\u003e in the context of an agricultural marketing cooperative means the ability to cope with external disturbances such as market fluctuations or political changes without altering its fundamental function, structure or identity. Robustness also refers to how quickly the cooperative can absorb external disturbances and economic setbacks and how rapidly it can recover from them. A robust marketing cooperative has, for example, stable and diverse sales channels, resilient supply chains, and financial structures that remain stable even in difficult times. A robust marketing cooperative can also act sustainably in times of crisis and contribute to maintaining the social fabric in rural areas.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAdaptability\u003c/em\u003e in the context of an agricultural marketing cooperative is the ability to adapt to changing market trends, customer preferences and technologies. This could include, for example, offering new products or adapting to digital market conditions.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTransformability\u003c/em\u003e in the context of an agricultural marketing cooperative is the cooperative\u0026apos;s ability to implement comprehensive changes to remain relevant and competitive in the long term. This may include restructuring business models, exploring new markets or transitioning to more sustainable practices.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eResilience\u003c/em\u003e in the context of an agricultural marketing cooperative is the cooperative\u0026apos;s ability to take preparatory measures to cope with challenges, mitigate immediate crisis consequences and adapt to changed framework conditions. A resilient cooperative would be able to quickly respond to unexpected events, implement effective crisis management strategies and learn from experiences to improve its adaptability.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCooperative values\u003c/em\u003e include self-help, self-responsibility, democracy, equality, equity and solidarity. \u003cem\u003eCooperative principles\u003c/em\u003e include voluntary and open membership, democratic member control, member economic participation, autonomy and independence, education, training and information, cooperation among cooperatives, and concern for the community.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn the second part of the survey, members were asked about their involvement and communication in their agricultural marketing cooperative. Here, too, they were asked to give a rating on an equally distributed 5-point Likert scale. In the third part of the survey, members were asked for socio-demographic information\u003ca href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\" title=\"\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003csup\u003e10\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFor the online survey, a link was created. This link was sent to the 18 participants from the qualitative interviews with a request to forward it to all cooperative members, regardless of their position (member, employee, management). Additionally, the link was sent to the German Raiffeisen Association (DRV) with a request to forward it to all agricultural marketing cooperatives and to ask them to distribute it to their members. The survey was conducted from March 2024 to July 2024. In total, 1390 people followed the link to the survey, but only 144 followed the survey through until the end and completed it. These 144 responses could be used for the analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAs compensation, participants received the option to receive \u0026euro;10 or donate it. Furthermore, participants could choose whether they wanted to participate in a raffle for five construction site radios. Participants could also select whether they would like to receive a short summary of the results after the completing the project.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.2 Estimation techniques\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStructural equation modeling (SEM) is used to analyze cause-and-effect relationships between variables that cannot be directly observed. These variables, known as latent variables or constructs, are inferred from indicators, which are responses collected through surveys. Specifically, PLS-SEM focuses on maximizing the explained variance (R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e) of a primary or key construct (Hair et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Hair et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e) such as agricultural marketing cooperative members\u0026rsquo; perceived resilience (Hair et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe evaluation of PLS-SEM models involves two steps. In the first step, the relationship between indicators and constructs is analyzed. Each indicator is modeled as a linear combination of its associated construct and an error term. With this estimation shown in Eqs.\u0026nbsp;(1) and (2), it is modelled how well each indicator represents its construct.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:{X}_{i}=\\:{\\varLambda\\:}_{i}{\\xi\\:}_{i}+\\epsilon\\:\\:\\:\\:\\:(\\text{e}\\text{x}\\text{o}\\text{g}\\text{e}\\text{n}\\text{o}\\text{u}\\text{s}\\:\\text{c}\\text{o}\\text{n}\\text{s}\\text{t}\\text{r}\\text{u}\\text{c}\\text{t}\\:{\\xi\\:}_{i}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e)(1)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:{X}_{j}=\\:{\\varLambda\\:}_{j}{\\xi\\:}_{j}+\\delta\\:\\:\\:\\:\\:(\\text{e}\\text{n}\\text{d}\\text{o}\\text{g}\\text{e}\\text{n}\\text{o}\\text{u}\\text{s}\\:\\text{c}\\text{o}\\text{n}\\text{s}\\text{t}\\text{r}\\text{u}\\text{c}\\text{t}\\:{\\xi\\:}_{j}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e)(2)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ewhere \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:{\\xi\\:}_{j}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e is the vector of the endogenous constructs and \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:{\\xi\\:}_{i}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e is the vector of the exogenous constructs and. \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:{X}_{i}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:{X}_{j}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e represent the related vectors of indicator (\u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:{x}_{1},\\dots\\:,{x}_{i};{x}_{1},\\dots\\:,{x}_{j})\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e of the exogenous construct \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:{\\xi\\:}_{i}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e and endogenous construct \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:{\\xi\\:}_{j}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e, respectively. Moreover,\u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:\\:{\\varLambda\\:}_{i}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:{\\varLambda\\:}_{j}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e reflect the matrices of the indicator loading (\u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:{\\lambda\\:}_{1},\\dots\\:,\\:{\\lambda\\:}_{k})\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e with \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:K\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e as the number of indicators. The vectors of measurement errors for the indicators are represented as \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:\\epsilon\\:\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:\\delta\\:\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (Chin, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1998\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe evaluation of a reflective outer model in PLS-SEM includes assessing several key metrics: indicator reliability, internal consistency, convergent validity and discriminant validity. To evaluate indicator reliability, loadings (\u0026lambda;) of an indicator should exceed a threshold of 0.7. A loading higher than 0.7 suggests that more than 50% of the indicator\u0026apos;s variance is accounted for. For internal consistency within the outer model, the composite reliability (CR) should surpass a threshold of 0.7, indicating that the indicators cohesively measure the same underlying construct. The average variance extracted (AVE) serves as the quality criterion for convergent validity and should be greater than a threshold of 0.5, suggesting that the construct explains over half of the variance of its indicators (Hair et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Discriminant validity is assessed through Heterotrait-Monotrait (HTMT) correlations among the constructs, ensuring that each construct is distinct. The HTMT ratios should ideally not exceed a threshold of 0.9 to confirm discriminant validity (Hair et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Henseler et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, a lack of discriminant validity can be excluded if a value of 1 does not fall in the 95% confidence intervals (Henseler et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Lastly, variance inflation factors (VIFs) are calculated to address potential multicollinearity problems. VIFs should not exceed a threshold of 5.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn contrast to reflective constructs where indicators are interchangeable, formative constructs consists of non-interchangeable indicators. Likewise, formative requires the that collinearity issues among the indicators are not present, which is checked via VIFs. Furthermore, the statistical significance of the indicators is checked via outer weights (\u0026gamma;). If one indicators weight is not statistically significant, the loading of the indicator should exceed 0.5.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn the second phase of evaluating PLS-SEM, the inner model is estimated, which examines the relationships between exogenous and endogenous constructs using standardized path coefficients (\u0026beta;):\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Equ1\" class=\"Equation\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"mathdisplay\" id=\"FileID_Equ1\" name=\"EquationSource\"\u003e$$\\:{\\xi\\:}_{j}={\\rm\\:B}{\\xi\\:}_{j}+\\:\\varGamma\\:{\\xi\\:}_{i}+\\:\\zeta\\:$$\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"EquationNumber\"\u003e3\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEquation (\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e) delineates how endogenous constructs (as outcomes) and exogenous constructs (as predictors) interact. The path coefficient matrices, \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:{\\rm\\:B}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e and\u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:\\:\\varGamma\\:\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e, represent these relationships. The \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:{\\rm\\:B}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e matrix captures the causal effects between endogenous constructs, while the \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:\\varGamma\\:\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e matrix describes the effects of exogenous on endogenous constructs. Moreover, the model includes a residuals vector (\u0026zeta;), indicating that the exogenous constructs do not completely account for the variance observed in the endogenous constructs.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTo validate the statistical significance of the path coefficients (\u0026beta;), a bootstrapping procedure with 10,000 subsamples is used, allowing for t-statistic estimates and also to estimate confidence intervals for the HTMT values. Additionally, the R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e values for the target construct are calculated to assess the model\u0026apos;s explanatory power. To account for possible non-linear relationships quadratic terms are added and the linear and non-linear model results are compared using the Bayesian information criterion (BIC) (Hair et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). For this analysis, SmartPLS 4 was employed to estimate the model parameters (Ringle et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4 Results and Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.1 \u0026nbsp;Sample\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1390 people followed the link to the survey and started it. From these, 144 usable records could be used for the analysis.\u0026nbsp;The average age of participants is 50.07 years, with a standard deviation of 12.86 years and a considerable spread in ages, ranging from 24 to 77 years old. Gender distribution shows that only 9% of the participants are female. 28% of the participants have a university degree or a degree from a university of applied sciences. In addition, 75% of the participants identify themselves as farmers.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 1: Descriptive sample statistics (N = 144)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10.9272%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54.6358%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDescription\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.5828%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMean\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7.78146%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSD\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7.28477%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMin\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6.78808%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMax\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10.9272%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eage\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54.6358%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eParticipants\u0026lsquo; age in years\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.5828%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e50.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7.78146%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.86\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7.28477%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6.78808%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e77\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10.9272%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003egender\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54.6358%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1, if the participant is female; otherwise 0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.5828%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7.78146%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7.28477%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6.78808%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10.9272%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003euni\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54.6358%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1, if the participant has a university degree or a degree from a university of applied sciences; otherwise 0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.5828%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7.78146%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7.28477%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6.78808%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10.9272%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eagr\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54.6358%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1, if the participant is a farmer; otherwise 0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.5828%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7.78146%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7.28477%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6.78808%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSD = Standard deviation\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFigure 2 shows the relative membership length frequency in their agricultural marketing cooperatives. The slight majority of participants have been members for more than twenty years.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFigure 3 shows the results regarding members\u0026apos; communication perceptions within the cooperative, their personal commitment to the cooperative and the cooperative\u0026apos;s contribution to their personal or professional development.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCommunication within the cooperative\u003c/em\u003e: The majority of members rate communication positively. 44.44% rate it as \u0026quot;rather good\u0026quot; and 12.50% as \u0026quot;very good\u0026quot;, totaling 56.94% positive ratings. 28.47% are neutral, while 14.59% rate it negatively (10.42% \u0026quot;rather bad\u0026quot; and 4.17% \u0026quot;very bad\u0026quot;). This suggests that while communication is generally perceived well, there is room for improvement.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePersonal commitment to the cooperative\u003c/em\u003e: Members show a high level of personal commitment. 25.69% rate their commitment as \u0026quot;very high\u0026quot; and 28.47% as \u0026quot;high\u0026quot;, totaling 54.16% high commitment. 28.47% report medium commitment. Only 28.48% report low (18.06%) or very low (10.42%) commitment. This indicates strong member engagement overall.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eContribution to personal or professional development\u003c/em\u003e: The cooperative appears to contribute significantly to members\u0026apos; development. 40.97% report it has contributed \u0026quot;rather a lot\u0026quot; and 11.11% \u0026quot;very much\u0026quot;, totaling 52.08% positive impact. 27.08% are neutral (\u0026quot;neither\u0026quot;), while 20.84% report little (11.81%) or very little (9.03%) contribution. This suggests the cooperative provides valuable development opportunities for many members.\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.2 \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; Model results\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 2 shows the results from the outer model assessment. Robustness, adaptability, transformability and the cooperatives values are reflective while the perceived resilience is formative in nature in accordance with Slijper et al. (2020). Variance inflation factors of all indicators range between 1.116 and 4.107, indicating that multi-collinearity is no threat to the model (Hair et al., 2022). The descriptive results from Table 2 offer insights into how members perceive various resilience aspects from their agricultural marketing cooperatives.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn terms of robustness, members generally express high confidence in their cooperatives\u0026apos; ability to withstand challenges and maintain operations. This is particularly evident in their strong agreement with the statement \u0026quot;Our cooperative remains operational during market fluctuations and continuously ensures the supply and sale of our products\u0026quot; (rob1; mean = 4.38). Members also believe that their cooperatives contribute to sustainability in agriculture, even during difficult times (rob2; mean = 4.07), and have effective strategies to remain operational during crises (rob4; mean = 4.10). These high scores, all above 4 on a 5-point scale, suggest that members perceive their cooperatives as stable and resilient entities capable of weathering various challenges.\u0026nbsp;This strong confidence in the cooperative\u0026apos;s ability to remain operational and contribute to sustainability even in difficult times suggests that the cooperative model is seen as inherently stable. This perception could be an important asset for cooperatives, potentially aiding in member retention and recruitment. However, it also implies a responsibility for cooperative leadership to maintain this high level of robustness to meet member expectations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRegarding adaptability, members\u0026apos; perceptions are generally positive, albeit slightly less enthusiastic than for robustness. They agree that their cooperatives can effectively adapt their product range to changing market conditions (adapt1; mean = 3.85) and quickly adapt to market trends (adapt2; mean = 3.82). There\u0026apos;s a slightly lower, but still positive, perception of the cooperatives\u0026apos; ability to swiftly integrate new technological developments (adapt3; mean = 3.72). Interestingly, members generally disagree with the statement \u0026quot;Our cooperative is not able to flexibly design its business strategies to respond to changes in the market environment\u0026quot; (adapt4; mean = 2.19), further supporting the overall adaptability perception.\u0026nbsp;The adaptability scores, while positive, are slightly lower than those for robustness. This suggests that members perceive room for improvement in their cooperatives\u0026apos; ability to adapt to changing market conditions and integrate new technologies.\u0026nbsp;The implication here is that cooperatives may need to focus on enhancing their adaptive capacities. Developing and communicating clear strategies for adaptation could help improve member perceptions in this area and their commitment.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTransformability scores are consistently positive across all items, with means ranging from 3.85 to 3.89. Members perceive their cooperatives as open to extensive structural changes to maintain long-term market position (trans1; mean = 3.89) and willing to rethink their business models to pursue new market opportunities (trans2; mean = 3.85). Participants also agree that exploring new markets and expanding offerings are central to their cooperatives\u0026apos; growth strategies (trans3; mean = 3.85). Notably, members agree that their cooperatives are willing to adjust business processes for economic and ecological sustainability (trans4; mean = 3.89), indicating a forward-thinking approach to transformation.\u0026nbsp;Transformability scores are consistently positive across all items, indicating that members view their cooperatives as open to substantial changes when necessary. This openness to transformation, including structural changes and new market exploration, suggests that cooperatives have a solid foundation for implementing large-scale changes if required. The implication is that cooperatives may be well-positioned to undertake major strategic shifts, should market conditions demand it.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe cooperative values and principles are strongly endorsed by members, with high agreement across all statements. Members particularly agree that \u0026quot;The cooperative values and principles as a whole contribute to strengthening the resilience of our cooperative\u0026quot; (value1; mean = 3.85) and that adhering to these principles equips them better to overcome crises and challenges together (value2; mean = 3.92). There is also a strong agreement that their cooperative culture improves adaptability to changing conditions (value3; mean = 3.72) and that the sense of community fostered by these values is crucial for quick recovery from setbacks (value4; mean = 3.78).\u0026nbsp;The high scores for cooperative values and principles imply that members strongly believe in the importance of these foundational elements to their cooperative\u0026apos;s resilience. This suggests that cooperatives should continue to emphasize and reinforce these values in their operations and communications, especially when communicating potential resilience strategies.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe factor loadings for most reflective indicators are well above the recommended threshold of 0.7 and statistically significant. The only exception is the reversed item in the adaptability construct (adapt4), which has a lower loading of 0.424. Following Hair et al. (2022), we retained apat4 as its loading exceeds 0.4 and is also statistically significant. Regarding the outer model results, all reflective constructs show high CR (CR \u0026gt; 0.7) and AVE (AVE \u0026gt; 0.5) values, indicating good internal consistency and convergent validity\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe resilience construct, being formative in nature, is measured by three distinct statements that capture different facets of perceived current and future resilience within agricultural marketing cooperatives. The first statement, \u0026quot;I think it\u0026apos;s easy for our cooperative to deal with current challenges,\u0026quot; yields a mean score of 3.40 on a 5-point Likert scale. This moderate level of agreement suggests that members generally believe their cooperative can handle current challenges, albeit with some difficulty. The second statement, \u0026quot;I think our cooperative is well positioned for current challenges,\u0026quot; garners a higher level of agreement with a mean of 3.94. This indicates that members have relatively strong confidence in their cooperative\u0026apos;s current positioning to face challenges, more so than in the ease of dealing with these challenges. Looking to the future, the third statement, \u0026quot;For the future, I believe our cooperative is very well positioned to master all future challenges,\u0026quot; shows a mean of 3.83. This demonstrates a robust belief in the cooperative\u0026apos;s future resilience, though slightly less than the confidence in current positioning.\u0026nbsp;Regarding the formative resilience construct, the varying means across the three items provide interesting insights. The lower score for ease of dealing with current challenges (mean 3.40) compared to positioning for current and future challenges (means 3.94 and 3.83 respectively) implies that while members believe their cooperatives are well-positioned, they recognize that overcoming challenges is not always easy. This realistic assessment suggests that cooperatives should strive for transparency about the difficulties they face while also highlighting their strategies for overcoming these challenges.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRegarding the validity of the formative construct, all three items show statistically significant weights\u003ca href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\" title=\"\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003csup\u003e11\u003c/sup\u003e (0.405, 0.297, and 0.450 respectively). The weights, being all positive and statistically significant, suggest that each aspect uniquely contributes to the formation of the resilience construct. Notably, the future-oriented statement has the highest weight (0.450), implying that long-term resilience plays a particularly crucial role in a members\u0026apos; overall perception of cooperative resilience.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e: Outer model assessment \u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"100%\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRobustness (CR = 0.923; AVE = 0.749) \u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMean \u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSD\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026lambda; \u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026gamma;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003erob1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOur cooperative remains operational during market fluctuations and continuously ensures the supply and sale of our products\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.38\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.77\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.841***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003erob2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEven in difficult times, our cooperative contributes to sustainability in agriculture\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.94\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.895***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003erob3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOur cooperative can cope well with an economic setback and recovers quickly from it\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.84\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.862***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003erob4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOur cooperative has effective strategies that ensure our cooperative remains operational even in times of crisis\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.95\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.864***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAdaptability (CR = 0.866; AVE = 0.632) \u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eadapt1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOur cooperative effectively adapts its product range to changing market conditions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.85\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.880***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eadapt2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOur cooperative is able to adapt quickly to market trends and thus benefit from them\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.82\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.85\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.899***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eadapt3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNew technological developments are swiftly integrated by our cooperative to improve efficiency and competitiveness\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.72\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.96\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.876***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eadapt4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOur cooperative is not able to flexibly design its business strategies to respond to changes in the market environment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.19\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.424***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTransformability (CR = 0.890; AVE = 0.670) \u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003etrans1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOur cooperative is open to extensive structural changes to maintain its position in the market in the long term\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.89\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.95\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.797***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003etrans2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWe are willing and able to rethink our business model to pursue new market opportunities\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.85\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.92\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.856***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003etrans3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eExploring new markets and expanding our offerings are central components of our strategy for growth and diversification\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.85\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.98\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.812***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003etrans4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEconomically and ecologically sustainable practices are important to our cooperative, and we are willing to adjust our business processes accordingly to be future-proof\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.89\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.88\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.808***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCooperatives values and principles (CR = 0.946; AVE = 0.814) \u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003evalue1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe cooperative values and principles as a whole contribute to strengthening the resilience of our cooperative\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.85\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.93\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.931***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003evalue2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBy adhering to our cooperative values and principles, we are better equipped to overcome crises and challenges together\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.92\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.893***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003evalue3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOur cooperative culture, based on our shared values and principles, improves our adaptability to changing market and environmental conditions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.72\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.91\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.885***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003evalue4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe strong sense of community and solidarity fostered by our cooperative values and principles are crucial for our ability to quickly recover from setbacks\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.78\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.900***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eResilience \u003csup\u003ed\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eres1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI think it is easy for our cooperative to deal with current challenges\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.98\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.749***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.405***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eres2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI think our cooperative is well positioned for current challenges\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.94\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.88\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.922***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.297***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eres3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFor the future, I believe our cooperative is very well positioned to master all future challenges\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.83\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.98\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.899***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.450***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e Rob = Robustness; Adapt = Adaptability; Trans = Transformability; Value = Cooperative values and principles; Res = Perceive Resilience; \u0026lambda; = Loading;\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026gamma; = Weight; CR = Composite reliability; AVE = Average variance extracted; SD = Standard deviation\u003cbr\u003e\u003csup\u003eb\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003eCut-off level \u0026lambda; \u0026gt; 0.7; CR \u0026gt; 0.7; AVE \u0026gt; 0.5\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003csup\u003ec\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003eStatements were evaluated using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = high disagreement; 5 = high agreement)\u003csup\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003csup\u003ed\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003eFor a formative construct, CR and AVE are not given and factor weights in addition to loadings are provided.\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;***p \u0026lt; 0.001; **p \u0026lt; 0.01; *p \u0026lt; 0.5\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 3 shows the results for the HTMT criterion. All HTMT ratios are below 0.9 and their confidence intervals does not include the value of 1, which confirms sufficient discriminant validity. The assessment of the HTMT values confirms the validity and consistency of the outer model and one can proceed with the inner model assessment.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eTable 3: HTMT results (N = 144)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"100%\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 35px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAdaptability\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 35px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCooperatives values and principles\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRobustness\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 35px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCooperatives values and principles\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.737\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[0.611;0.839]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 35px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 35px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRobustness\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.871\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[0.787;0.933]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 35px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.754\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[0.650;0.837]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 35px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTransformability\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.894\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[0.813;0.966]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 35px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.760\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[0.649;0.849]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.835\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[0.749;0.903]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCut-off level HTMT \u0026gt; 0.9. In square brackets the 95% bootstrap confidence intervals of the HTMT estimates are shown (10,000 subsamples)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 4 shows the inner model results. We compared the basic model of perceived resilience based on Slijper et al. (2020) with the extended model which adds cooperatives values and principles as an individual own resilience capacity. In the lower part of Table 4, values for BIC and adj. R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e values are given. Following Danks et al. (2010) the improvement in BIC and adj. R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e supports the use of the extended model. In the next step, a linear extended model is compared with a non-linear extended model, with the latter including quadratic interaction effects of each predictive construct. The non-linear model is favored by the adj. R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e values, while the BIC value supports the use of the linear model. However, as the increase in adj. R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e is only small, and the BIC value support the use of the linear extended model, we proceed with the analysis of linear extended model. The chosen linear extended model explains 63.30% of the variation of the perceived resilience of the agricultural marketing cooperatives.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the extended linear model, all four hypothesized relationships (H1-H4) show statistical significance, each contributing uniquely to the resilience perception among cooperative members. Hence, higher levels of robustness, adaptability, transformability as well as valuation of cooperative values and principles can lead to higher and improved resilience, which is line with the literature (e.g. Darnhofer, 2014; Meuwissen et al., 2019; Slijper et al., 2020) and also confirms the hypotheses.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRobustness (\u003cem\u003eH1\u003c/em\u003e) exhibits a positive effect on perceived resilience (\u0026beta; = 0.195 [0.044;0.336]), indicating that members\u0026apos; confidence in their cooperative\u0026apos;s ability to withstand external disturbances contributes to overall resilience perceptions. This relationship suggests that members view their cooperative\u0026apos;s ability to absorb shocks and maintain core functions as an important foundation for (future) resilience. The positive influence reflects confidence in the cooperative\u0026apos;s capacity to remain operational even in challenging times. However, the relatively lower coefficient compared to other factors indicates that while robustness is crucial, it may be seen as a necessary but not sufficient condition for future resilience. Adaptability (\u003cem\u003eH2\u003c/em\u003e) also positively influences perceived resilience (\u0026beta; = 0.217 [0.034;0.421]), suggesting that the cooperative\u0026apos;s capacity to adapt to changing market conditions and technologies is a crucial factor for members\u0026apos; assessing (future) resilience. Members appear to recognize that higher adaptive capacity is crucial for navigating an increasingly dynamic agricultural sector. Transformability (\u003cem\u003eH3\u003c/em\u003e) shows a positive relationship with perceived resilience (\u0026beta; = 0.218 [-0.009;0.418]), implying that members\u0026apos; belief in their cooperative\u0026apos;s ability to implement comprehensive changes enhances their resilience perception. For agricultural marketing cooperatives, this capacity might involve noteworthy shifts in business models, such as moving into value-added processing or exploring new ventures. Notably, the construct of cooperative values and principles (\u003cem\u003eH4\u003c/em\u003e) demonstrates the strongest positive effect on perceived resilience (\u0026beta; = 0.282 [0.147;0.420]). The stronger the adherence to cooperative values and principles, the higher the perceived future resilience. This relationship emphasizes that members view the adherence to cooperative principles as a critical capacity for facing future challenges. The higher coefficient suggests that members believe the sense of community, democratic control and shared responsibility inherent in the cooperative model, will be particularly valuable in adapting to and overcoming (future) obstacles.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe hierarchy of influences (cooperative values \u0026gt; transformability \u0026asymp; adaptability \u0026gt; robustness) provides important insights into how members prioritize different capacities for future resilience. While all capacities are statistically significant, the stronger influence of cooperative values suggests that members view this as the most crucial capacity for future challenges. The similar coefficients for adaptability and transformability indicate that members see both incremental and radical change capabilities as equally important for (future) resilience.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhile the non-linear model was not selected for final interpretation due to its higher BIC value and only marginal increase in R\u0026sup2; adj., it presents an intriguing finding regarding transformability. The negative path coefficient for the quadratic term of transformability (Trans\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e) in the non-linear model suggests a potential curvilinear relationship. This could indicate that while some degree of transformability enhances perceived resilience, excessive transformation might actually decrease it. One could suggest, this could be due to a loss of identity, making it difficult for members to identify with a rapidly or dramatically changing agricultural marketing cooperative. This finding, although not part of our main model, highlights the delicate balance agricultural marketing cooperatives must strike between adaptability and maintaining their core identity.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 4: Inner model results (N = 144)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 93px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 150px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBasic model\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 331px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eExtended model\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 93px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 150px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLinear Model\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 161px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLinear Model\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNon-linear model\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 93px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eH\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 87px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003et-value \u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003et-value \u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003et-value \u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 93px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRob\u0026nbsp;\u0026agrave;\u0026nbsp;Res\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eH1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 87px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.294**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[0.139;0.442]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.182\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.195*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[0.044;0.336]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.197\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.240***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[0.063;0.397]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.377\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 93px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAdapt\u0026nbsp;\u0026agrave;\u0026nbsp;Res\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eH2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 87px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.266*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[0.075;0.468]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.222\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.217*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[0.034;0.421]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.842\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.250**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[0.054;0.456]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.041\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 93px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTrans\u0026nbsp;\u0026agrave;\u0026nbsp;Res\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eH3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 87px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.298*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[0.077;0.497]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.341\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.218*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[-0.009;0.418]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.685\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.147\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[-0.096;0.365]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.039\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 93px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eValue\u0026nbsp;\u0026agrave;\u0026nbsp;Res\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eH4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 87px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.282***\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[0.147;0.420]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.380\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.300**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[0.161;0.456]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.359\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 93px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRob\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026agrave; Res\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 87px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.042\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[-0.042;0.115]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.873\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 93px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAdapt\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026agrave; Res\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 87px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.049\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[-0.053;0.164]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.748\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 93px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTrans\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026agrave; Res\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 87px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.105\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[-0.225;0.016]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.425\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 93px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eValue\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026agrave; Res\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 87px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 63px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 101px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.004\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[-0.061;0.089]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 69px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.047\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 93px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBIC\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 150px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-115.61\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 161px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-124.63\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-109.32\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 93px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eR\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e adj.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 31px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 150px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.599\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 161px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.633\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.655\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRob = Robustness; Adapt = Adaptability; Trans = Transformability; Value = Cooperative values and principles; Res = Perceive Resilience; adj = adjusted \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u003csup\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003eBootstrapping result with 10,000 sub-samples \u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;***p\u0026lt;0.001; **p\u0026lt;0.01; *p\u0026lt;0.05\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn conclusion, these results highlight that members perceive future resilience as a function of multiple, interconnected capacities. While the ability to absorb shocks (robustness) is important, members place greater emphasis on capacities that allow for adaptation and transformation. Most notably, they view the cooperative model itself, with its inherent values and principles, as the strongest capacity for navigating future challenges.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBased on the model results, we can derive several key implications for different stakeholders in the agricultural cooperative sector. For members, the findings emphasize the critical role of cooperative principles in resilience. Members should recognize that their active participation and adherence to cooperative values contribute to the organization\u0026apos;s resilience. This understanding should encourage them to engage more deeply in cooperative activities, including decision-making processes and collaborative initiatives (Figure 2).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eExecutives of agricultural marketing cooperatives should prioritize and reinforce the communication on how cooperative values are reflected in their management strategies, given their strong impact on perceived resilience. For instance, cooperative values can guide decisions on market expansion, ensuring that new ventures align with the organization\u0026apos;s commitment to community impact and sustainability. This finding is also important for cooperatives beyond agricultural marketing cooperatives with high membership value. It suggests that in these organizations, the cooperative model itself is seen as a crucial resilience capacity. In addition, they should develop balanced resilience strategies that maintain robustness while equally investing in improving the cooperative\u0026apos;s adaptability and transformability. In other words, by cultivating these capacities and strongly adhering to cooperative principles, these organizations can build member confidence in their ability to successfully navigate and thrive amidst future challenges in the agricultural sector.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis interaction between general resilience capacities and organization-specific characteristics may be relevant for understanding resilience in other types of organizations, particularly those with strong value-based cultures or democratic governance structures. Researchers have several avenues for further investigation based on these findings. They should explore how specific (cooperative) values and principles contribute to perceived resilience in different contexts and examine the interplay between robustness, adaptability and transformability, and how these interact with these values and principles in various scenarios.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.3 \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; Limitations\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhile this study provides valuable insights into the perceived resilience of agricultural marketing cooperatives, it is important to acknowledge several limitations. Firstly, the sample size with 144 usable responses is relatively small. For futures studies, a larger sample size could be beneficial. Secondly, the study relies on self-reported perceptions from cooperative members. While these perceptions are valuable, future research could benefit from incorporating objective measures of cooperative performance and resilience alongside member perceptions. Thirdly, the cross-sectional nature of the study provides a snapshot of member perceptions at a single point in time. Resilience, however, is a dynamic concept that may change over time in response to various internal and external factors. Longitudinal studies could offer more robust insights into how resilience perceptions evolve and how they relate to actual cooperative performance over time.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"5 Concluding Remarks","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study provides valuable insights into the factors influencing perceived resilience in agricultural marketing cooperatives in Germany. By examining the roles of robustness, adaptability, transformability and cooperative values and principles, we have shed light on the complex dynamics that shape members' perceptions of their cooperatives' ability to withstand challenges and thrive in an ever-changing agricultural landscape. Our findings underscore the multifaceted nature of perceived resilience in agricultural marketing cooperatives. While all examined factors contribute statistically significantly to perceived resilience, the strong influence of cooperative values and principles stands out as a key insight. This suggests that the unique characteristics of the cooperative model itself play a crucial role in building members' confidence in their organization's resilience. The positive relationships between robustness, adaptability and transformability with perceived resilience highlight the importance of developing a balanced approach to resilience-building in cooperatives. Members value not only their cooperative's ability to withstand shocks (robustness) but also its capacity to adapt to changing conditions (adaptability) and fundamentally transform when necessary (transformability). This balanced perspective suggests that cooperative leaders should focus on enhancing all these capacities to boost member confidence in their organization's resilience. Particularly noteworthy is the paramount role of cooperative values and principles in shaping perceived resilience. This finding underscores the importance of maintaining and reinforcing these foundational elements of the cooperative model. It suggests that adhering to principles such as democratic member control, member economic participation and concern for community not only defines the cooperative's identity but also contributes to its perceived resilience. By leveraging their unique strengths, particularly their foundational values and principles, these cooperatives can build on their members' confidence to navigate future challenges successfully. This not only benefits the cooperatives and their members but also contributes to the overall resilience and sustainability of the agricultural sector.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003eEthic approval was obtained by the German Association for Experimental Economic Research e.V.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to data collection, all participants received a brief introduction to the research and its objectives. They were informed about participation conditions and data protection provisions, which required their active consent.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgments\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eWe would like to thank the Raiffeisen Stiftung for its financial support and Marion Danneboom for her ongoing support with this project. We would also like to thank the interviewees and all participants in the survey.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAdams, I., Roth, M., \u0026amp; Doluschitz, R. (2016). Neue Gesch\u0026auml;ftsfelder f\u0026uuml;r Genossenschaften: Chancen, Grenzen und Perspektiven in Baden-W\u0026uuml;rttemberg. \u003cem\u003eZeitschrift f\u0026uuml;r das gesamte Genossenschaftswesen\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e66\u003c/em\u003e(2), 127-143.DOI: 10.1515/zfgg-2016-0013\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBalk, A., \u0026amp; Schaffhauser-Linzatti, M. (2021). Genossenschaften in Zeiten von Krisen-Die Sichtweise von GenossenschaftexpertInnen und-mitgliedern auf die Corona-Krise. \u003cem\u003eZeitschrift f\u0026uuml;r das gesamte Genossenschaftswesen\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e71\u003c/em\u003e(3), 168-191. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfgg-2021-0011\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBardsley, D. K., \u0026amp; Bardsley, A. M. (2014). Organising for socio-ecological resilience: The roles of the mountain farmer cooperative Genossenschaft Gran Alpin in Graub\u0026uuml;nden, Switzerland. \u003cem\u003eEcological Economics\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e98\u003c/em\u003e, 11-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.12.004\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBijman, J., Iliopoulos, C., Poppe, K. J., Gijselinckx, C., Hagedorn, K., Hanisch, M., Hendrikse, G. W. J., K\u0026uuml;hl, R., Ollila, P., Pyykk\u0026ouml;nen, P., \u0026amp; van der Sangen, G. (2012).\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eSupport for Farmers\u0026apos; Cooperatives : executive summary\u003c/em\u003e. Wageningen UR.\u0026nbsp;https://edepot.wur.nl/245007\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBilliet, A., Dufays, F., Friedel, S., \u0026amp; Staessens, M. (2021). The resilience of the cooperative model: How do cooperatives deal with the COVID‐19 crisis?. \u003cem\u003eStrategic Change\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e30\u003c/em\u003e(2), 99-108. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsc.2393\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBirchall, J., \u0026amp; Ketilson, L. H. (2009). \u003cem\u003eResilience of the cooperative business model in times of crisis\u003c/em\u003e. International Labour Organisation.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBoehlje, M., Akridge, J., \u0026amp; Downey, D. (1995). Restructuring agribusiness for the 21st century. \u003cem\u003eAgribusiness\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(6), 493-500. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6297(199511/12)11:6%3C493::AID-AGR2720110602%3E3.0.CO;2-G\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBorda‐Rodriguez, A., Johnson, H., Shaw, L., \u0026amp; Vicari, S. (2016). What makes rural co‐operatives resilient in developing countries?. \u003cem\u003eJournal of International Development\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e28\u003c/em\u003e(1), 89-111. https://doi.org/10.1002/jid.3125\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBorda-Rodriguez, A., \u0026amp; Vicari, S. (2014). Rural co-operative resilience: the case of Malawi. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Co-operative Organization and Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e(1), 43-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcom.2014.03.002\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eChin, W. W. (1998) The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modeling. In: Marcoulides G. A. (eds.). Modern methods for business research. Mahwah, NJ, London: Lawrence Erlbaum; Taylor \u0026amp; Francis e-Library, p. 295\u0026ndash;358\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDanks, N. P., Sharma, P. N., \u0026amp; Sarstedt, M. (2020). Model selection uncertainty and multimodel inference in partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). \u003cem\u003eJournal of Business Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e113\u003c/em\u003e, 13-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.03.019\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDarnhofer, I. (2014). Resilience and why it matters for farm management. \u003cem\u003eEuropean Review of Agricultural Economics\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e41\u003c/em\u003e(3), 461-484. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbu012\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDavies, W. (2009). \u003cem\u003eReinventing the firm\u003c/em\u003e. Demos. http://www.demos.co.uk/publications/reinventing-the-firm\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eElsen, S. (2022). Die Bedeutung von Genossenschaften f\u0026uuml;r die \u0026ouml;ko-soziale Transformation unter Ber\u0026uuml;cksichtigung neuer Entwicklungen in Italien und Deutschland. \u003cem\u003eZ\u0026apos;GuG Zeitschrift f\u0026uuml;r Gemeinwirtschaft und Gemeinwohl\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e45\u003c/em\u003e(4), 595-615. DOI: 10.5771/2701-4193-2022-4-595\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eEuropean Commission (2020): Communication from the Commission of the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. A Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system COM/2020/381 final. Online available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0381.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFeindt, P. H., Meuwissen, M., Balmann, A., Finger, R., Mathijs, E., Paas, W., ... \u0026amp; Reidsma, P. (2022). Understanding and addressing the resilience crisis of Europe\u0026rsquo;s farming systems.\u0026nbsp;In: Meuwissen et al. (eds.), Resilient and Sustainable Farming Systems in Europe. Cambridge University Press, pp. 342-374. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/9781009093569.021\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFolke, C., Carpenter, S. R., Walker, B., Scheffer, M., Chapin, T., \u0026amp; Rockstr\u0026ouml;m, J. (2010). Resilience thinking: integrating resilience, adaptability and transformability. \u003cem\u003eEcology and society\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(4).\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eGollisch, S., \u0026amp; Theuvsen, L. (2018). Risikomanagement im Landhandel: Charakteristika, Herausforderungen, Implikationen. \u003cem\u003eBerichte \u0026uuml;ber Landwirtschaft \u0026ndash; Zeitschrift f\u0026uuml;r Landwirtschaft und Agrarpolitik\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e93\u003c/em\u003e(1). https://doi.org/10.12767/buel.v93i1.72\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C.M. \u0026amp; Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC, Melbourne: SAGE.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHair, J. F., Hair, J., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., \u0026amp; Gudergan, S. P. (2023). Advanced issues in partial least squares structural equation modeling. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC, Melbourne: SAGE.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., \u0026amp; Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Marketing theory and Practice,\u0026nbsp;19\u003c/em\u003e(2), 139-152. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L., \u0026amp; Kuppelwieser, V. G. (2014). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): An emerging tool in business research. \u003cem\u003eEuropean business review,\u0026nbsp;26\u003c/em\u003e(2), 106-121. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-10-2013-0128\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., \u0026amp; Mena, J. A. (2012). An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research. \u003cem\u003eJournal of the academy of marketing science,\u0026nbsp;40\u003c/em\u003e, 414-433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-011-0261-6\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHanf, J., \u0026amp; K\u0026uuml;hl, R. (2005). Raiffeisen-Genossenschaften in einem sich wandelnden Agri-Food Business-noch eine Zukunft?. \u003cem\u003eZeitschrift f\u0026uuml;r das gesamte Genossenschaftswesen\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e55\u003c/em\u003e(1), 210-223. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfgg-2005-0128\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHenseler, J., Ringle, C. M., \u0026amp; Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. \u003cem\u003eJournal of the academy of marketing science, 43\u003c/em\u003e, 115-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHill, S., \u0026amp; Doluschitz, R. (2014). Genossenschaftliche Werte\u0026ndash;Kern der genossenschaftlichen Identit\u0026auml;t?. \u003cem\u003eZeitschrift f\u0026uuml;r das gesamte Genossenschaftswesen\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e64\u003c/em\u003e(1), 19-30. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfgg-2014-0103\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHolling, C. S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, \u003cem\u003e4\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1-23.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eInternational Cooperative Alliance. What is a cooperative. Online available at: https://ica.coop/en, letzter Abruf 14.08.2024.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eK\u0026uuml;hl, R., \u0026amp; Hanf, C. H. (1985). Der Landwarenhandel in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland: Struktur, Entwicklung, Analyse.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLampel, J., Bhalla, A., \u0026amp; Jha, P. P. (2014). Does governance confer organisational resilience? Evidence from UK employee owned businesses. \u003cem\u003eEuropean Management Journal\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e32\u003c/em\u003e(1), 66-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2013.06.009\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMeuwissen, M. P., Feindt, P. H., Spiegel, A., Termeer, C. J., Mathijs, E., De Mey, Y., ... \u0026amp; Reidsma, P. (2019). A framework to assess the resilience of farming systems. \u003cem\u003eAgricultural Systems\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e176\u003c/em\u003e, 102656.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMeuwissen, M. P., Feindt, P. H., Garrido, A., Mathijs, E., Soriano, B., Urquhart, J., \u0026amp; Spiegel, A. (Eds.). (2022). \u003cem\u003eResilient and sustainable farming systems in Europe: exploring diversity and pathways\u003c/em\u003e. Cambridge University Press.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eNicholas-Davies, P., Fowler, S., Midmore, P., Coopmans, I., Draganova, M., Petitt, A., \u0026amp; Senni, S. (2021). Evidence of resilience capacity in farmers\u0026rsquo; narratives: Accounts of robustness, adaptability and transformability across five different European farming systems. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Rural Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e88\u003c/em\u003e, 388-399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.07.027\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eN\u0026uuml;ssel, M. (2013). Genossenschaften\u0026ndash;Unternehmensform zur F\u0026ouml;rderung einer nachhaltigen Agrarentwicklung. \u003cem\u003eZeitschrift f\u0026uuml;r das gesamte Genossenschaftswesen\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e63\u003c/em\u003e(2), 127-140. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfgg-2013-0205\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePrat-Benhamou, A., Bernu\u0026eacute;s, A., Gaspar, P., Lizarralde, J., Mancilla-Leyt\u0026oacute;n, J. M., Mandaluniz, N., ... \u0026amp; Mart\u0026iacute;n-Collado, D. (2024). How do farm and farmer attributes explain perceived resilience?. \u003cem\u003eAgricultural Systems\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e219\u003c/em\u003e, 104016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104016\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePerrin, A., Milestad, R., \u0026amp; Martin, G. (2020). Resilience applied to farming: organic farmers\u0026apos; perspectives. \u003cem\u003eEcology and Society\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e25\u003c/em\u003e(4). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-11897-250405\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRai, S. S., Rai, S., \u0026amp; Singh, N. K. (2021). Organizational resilience and social-economic sustainability: COVID-19 perspective. \u003cem\u003eEnvironment, Development and Sustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e23\u003c/em\u003e, 12006-12023.\u0026nbsp;https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-01154-6\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRingle, G. (2012). Kommunikationsmanagement im Mitgliedergesch\u0026auml;ft von Genossenschaften. \u003cem\u003eZeitschrift f\u0026uuml;r das gesamte Genossenschaftswesen\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e62\u003c/em\u003e(1), 3-18. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfgg-2012-0102\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRingle, C. M., Wende, S., \u0026amp; Becker, J.-M. (2024).\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eSmartPLS 4\u003c/em\u003e. B\u0026ouml;nningstedt: SmartPLS. Online available at: https://www.smartpls.com\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRosman, A., MacPherson, J., Arndt, M., \u0026amp; Helming, K. (2024). Perceived resilience of community supported agriculture in Germany.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAgricultural Systems\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e220\u003c/em\u003e, 104068. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104068\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSchmale, I. (2020). Nachhaltigkeit von und durch Genossenschaften. \u003cem\u003eHandbuch Genossenschaftswesen\u003c/em\u003e, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-18639-5_47-1#DOI\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSchulze, B. (2012). Herausforderungen des Landhandels unter ver\u0026auml;nderten Marktbedingungen: theoretische \u0026Uuml;berlegungen und empirische Evidenz. Paper presented at the 52\u003csup\u003end\u003c/sup\u003e Annual Conference of the German Association of Agricultural Economists (GeWiSoLa). http://dx.doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.133053\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSlijper, T., de Mey, Y., Poortvliet, P. M., \u0026amp; Meuwissen, M. P. (2020). From risk behavior to perceived farm resilience: a Dutch case study. \u003cem\u003eEcology and Society\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e25\u003c/em\u003e(4). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-11893-250410\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSoriano, B., Garrido, A., Bertolozzi-Caredio, D., Accatino, F., Antonioli, F., Krupin, V., ... \u0026amp; Bardaj\u0026iacute;, I. (2023). Actors and their roles for improving resilience of farming systems in Europe. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Rural Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e98\u003c/em\u003e, 134-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2023.02.003\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eStappel, M. (2023). Die deutschen Genossenschaften 2023 Entwicklungen \u0026ndash; Meinungen \u0026ndash; Zahlen. Online available at: https://www.dg-medienportal.de/dg-portal/xhtml/detail.jsf?docId=neuerscheinung_1161, last checked 28.08.2024.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSteiner, G., \u0026amp; Sch\u0026uuml;tt, A. (2011). \u0026bdquo;Vertrauen in Deutschland \u0026ldquo;und genossenschaftliche Werte. \u003cem\u003eZeitschrift f\u0026uuml;r das gesamte Genossenschaftswesen\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e61\u003c/em\u003e(3), 201-216. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfgg-2011-0304\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSpiegel, A., Slijper, T., de Mey, Y., Meuwissen, M. P., Poortvliet, P. M., Rommel, J., ... \u0026amp; Feindt, P. H. (2021). Resilience capacities as perceived by European farmers. \u003cem\u003eAgricultural Systems\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e193\u003c/em\u003e, 103224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2021.103224\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eTse, Y. K., Zhang, M., Zeng, W., \u0026amp; Ma, J. (2021). Perception of supply chain quality risk: Understanding the moderation role of supply market thinness. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Business Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e122\u003c/em\u003e, 822-834. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.07.003\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWalker, B., Holling, C. S., Carpenter, S. R., \u0026amp; Kinzig, A. (2004). Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social\u0026ndash;ecological systems. \u003cem\u003eEcology and society\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e(2). https://www.jstor.org/stable/26267673\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWilliams, T. A., Gruber, D. A., Sutcliffe, K. M., Shepherd, D. A., \u0026amp; Zhao, E. Y. (2017). Organizational response to adversity: Fusing crisis management and resilience research streams. \u003cem\u003eAcademy of management annals\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(2), 733-769. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2015.0134\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eZhao, G., Liu, S., \u0026amp; Lopez, C. (2017). A literature review on risk sources and resilience factors in agri-food supply chains. In \u003cem\u003eCollaboration in a Data-Rich World: 18th IFIP WG 5.5 Working Conference on Virtual Enterprises, PRO-VE 2017, Vicenza, Italy, September 18-20, 2017, Proceedings 18\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 739-752). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65151-4_66\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Footnotes","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e The term resilience can be traced back to a seminal paper from Holling (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1973\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e It should be noted that the literature already provided results regarding the cooperative organizational resilience which also highlight membership as part of the resilience contributing factors (e.g. Borda-Rodriguez and Vicari, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Borda-Rodriguez et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). However, these do not focus on member perceptions.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e It should be mentioned that the term is not new to agricultural researchers or economists (e.g. Darnhofer, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Further results can be found in Spiegel et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), Nicholas-Davies (2021), Soriano et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), Rosman (2024) or in Prat-Benhamou et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Cooperatively organized agricultural trade\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e In 2024, there were 1,859 cooperatives with 381,000 members (Stappel, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e It should be noted that the concept of resilience is not new to agribusiness. Boehlje et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1995\u003c/span\u003e, p. 493) describe: \u0026ldquo;Change is not new to the that industry [\u0026hellip;]. These changes are driven by changes in food consumer needs, wants and attitudes; new technological advances at all levels; increasing governmental regulations; and changes at the farm production level. [\u0026hellip;]. Awareness of these changes, these new directions [\u0026hellip;] is critical for strategic positioning and planning.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Bardsley and Bardsley (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e) provide evidence that cooperatives can contribute to farm system resilience.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Results from the qualitative interviews are not shown here.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e The members who were also active farmers were also asked to provide information about their farm. For example, they were asked about the arable and grassland areas they have. The results are not shown.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e The variance in weights also supports the formative nature of the construct, as it indicates that the items are not interchangeable and each captures a unique aspect of resilience.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"University of Göttingen","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"agricultural marketing cooperatives, partial least squares structural equation modelling, perceived resilience, resilience","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7303760/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7303760/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eCooperatives account for 40% of the agricultural market share in the European Union. This study investigates the factors influencing perceived resilience in German agricultural marketing cooperatives. Drawing on the resilience theory, we examine how not only robustness, adaptability and transformability, but also cooperative principles contribute to members' perceptions of their organization's resilience. Using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM), we analyze survey data from 144 agricultural marketing cooperative\u0026rsquo;s members collected online in Germany in 2024. Our findings reveal that all four factors statistically significantly contribute to perceived resilience, with cooperative values and principles showing the strongest influence. Our results suggest that while traditional resilience capacities like robustness, adaptability and transformability are important, the cooperative model itself, represented by its values and principles, plays a crucial role in members' perceptions of resilience. These results have important implications for cooperative management, suggesting that reinforcing cooperative values while developing balanced resilience strategies could enhance member confidence and organizational resilience. Thus, this study contributes to the growing literature on resilience by incorporating the unique aspects of cooperative organizations and emphasizing the role of member perceptions beyond the agricultural context.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Perception of Resilience: A Member's Perspective on German Agricultural Marketing Cooperatives","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-08-11 06:31:41","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7303760/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"4df35fa5-9c0c-406f-b491-e1db362fba24","owner":[],"postedDate":"August 11th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":52702390,"name":"Agricultural Economics \u0026 Policy"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-08-11T06:31:41+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-08-11 06:31:41","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7303760","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7303760","identity":"rs-7303760","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}