Bush, Simon

Mangnus, Ellen

Pouw, Nicky

Utrecht University Repository

Editorial overview: Towards an inclusive food systemsapproach for sustainable food and nutrition securityNicky Pouw, Simon Bush and Ellen MangnusCurrent Opinion in Environmental Sustainability2019, 41:93–96This review comes from a themed issue on Sustainabilityscience: inclusive business: a multi-stakeholder issueEdited by Nicky Pouw, Simon Bush and EllenMangnusFor a complete overview see the Issuehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2019.07.0021877-3435/ã 2019 Published by Elsevier B.V.IntroductionInclusive business has emerged as an instrumental approach to economic,social and environmental business goals [1]. As the concept continues todevelop, it moves beyond the relatively narrow economic focus of valuechain interventions [2–4]. Instead, inclusive business problematizes inclu-siveness as a dynamic process of innovation and partnerships that challengeestablished inequalities and power imbalances [1,5]. By focusing on theseinnovations and partnerships inclusive business enables new ways of think-ing about and redefining the terms of incorporating wider societal goals likesocial justice and environmental sustainability into economic practice [6].In this paper we reflect on the findings of a special issue on inclusivebusiness. Based on the collective findings of 13 papers we argue for a newconceptualization of inclusive business beyond value chains that focusesattention on a dynamic set of innovations and partnerships set within thecontext of sustainable food systems [7]. A food systems perspective canenable a more precise understanding of the interlinkages between thepractices of actors involved in production, trade and consumption, as wellas a broader set of conditioning social and socio-environmental relations [8].By making these practices and relations explicit, a food systems approach toinclusive business can also identify how the business and policy actors canfoster affordable, applicable and accessible (termed here as ‘triple-A’)innovations for supporting Bottom of the Pyramid (BoP) consumers, pro-ducers and entrepreneurs to build towards inclusive and sustainableoutcomes.The papers in the special issue were broadly organized into four themesquestioning the viability of inclusive business by and for the BoP. Thesewere (1) access to finance, (2) enabling (digital) technologies, (3) newpartnership and processes of learning, and (4) linking economic goals tosocial and environmental sustainability [9]. In this concluding paper wefirst synthesize the key lessons from these papers and themes beforeoutlining we see as a new framework for understanding ‘inclusive foodsystem’.Key lessonsWe identify eleven key lessons from the special issue that demonstrate theneed for a systems approach that incorporates governance, innovation forBoP inclusive and sustainable food systems.Nicky Pouw, Simon Bush andEllen MangnusAvailable online at www.sciencedirect.comScienceDirectwww.sciencedirect.com Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2019, 41:93–9694 Sustainability science: inclusive business: a multi-stakeholder issueFirst, BoP consumers, producers, workers and entrepreneursoperate at the interface between the informal and formaleconomy. BoP producers, consumers and entrepreneursface many ‘hidden costs’ that limit their income earningopportunities and render their ‘businesses’ unprofitable.These include economic, social and political ‘costs’, lead-ing to capacity and resource constraints and thresholds toinclusion [1,9–13]. Understanding what practices andrelational constraints make up the formal/informal inter-face is a starting point for overcoming the limitations ofinclusive business.Second, formal business and policy actors and institutionstend to overlook the contributions of BoP’s to local foodsystems, as well as their priorities and needs. The resultsof this oversight is that food quantities, qualities and flowsproduced and marketed by and sold to the BoP go largelyunrecorded in official statistics [14–17]. To better under-stand processes of inclusion and exclusion, even withinthe context of local food systems, new forms and modes ofinformation collection targeted at the BoP are needed.Third, gender and other social categorizations based onethnicity and age, influence BoP participation and out-comes in the food value chain. Capacity building fostersempowerment, but social upgrading is a societal broaderprocess that requires involvement and commitment bymultiple actors and institutions. The latter requires agender-aware business and governance framework[1,17]. Incorporating gender awareness as a central pillarof business and governance is therefore key to the pro-motion of inclusive business.Fourth, bottom-up innovations are highly effective in respond-ing to day-to-day agri-business challenges. Such innovationsare often times invented by the BoP themselves, but areneither shared with nor valued by other stakeholders.Simply put, innovative technologies can be professional-ized and upscaled when validated by broader groups ofstakeholders [1,18]. Greater attention in both research,policy and practice therefore needs to be given to foster-ing in situ ‘bottom up’ innovation processes.Fifth, the BoP lack critical connections to businesses andgovernment actors and institutions. This limits their poten-tial interaction with other food value chain actors andinstitutions, and limits their access and use of supportiveservices (e.g. finance, ICT, capacity building, extensionservices) [16,19]. New approaches by donors, businessand NGOs alike therefore need to be developed that canovercome structural barriers to making such connections.Sixth, social learning between the BoP, business andgovernment stakeholders can identify feasible strategiesfor mitigating economic, social and environmental trade-offs in business processes. Sharing group-based risks andorganizing through cooperatives can foster sustainableCurrent Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2019, 41:93–96 social learning processes and help to mitigate or discon-nect trade-offs between viable business interests andattaining social and environmental values [10,20–23].New methodologies that support social learning in away that overcomes power relations therefore need tobe developed and employed.Seventh, scientific innovations benefit the BoP when these areaffordable, accessible and adaptive (triple-A). Their addedvalue within a resource constrained context requires thevalidation by BoP users. Mutual validation — by bothscientific research and the lived realities of the BoP — isthus important for any type of innovation to pay off [11,14,18]. Achieving triple-A outcomes therefore needs to beincorporated into BoP innovation.Eighth, financial and business products and services needto be attuned to the capabilities and needs of the BoP toeffectively reduce vulnerability and risk. These productsand services can achieve this goal by improving consump-tion smoothing, savings and the agri-business planningcycle, as well as linking to win-win goals like climatesmart agriculture [11,23]. Such interventions can enableBoP’s to become more reliable supply and demand part-ners in both the local and global food system.Ninth, ICT’s that are used to create ‘hyper-transparency’ inlocal food systems, are both an opportunity and a threat to theBoP. Digitization can enhance inclusive agri-business bycreating better access to farm-level information, markets,financial services (e.g. mobile money, mobile financialservices) and assurance models. However, it can alsocreate new inequalities due to lack of ICT literacy, accessto digital networks and platforms, and ethical infringe-ment [12,16]. Inclusive business approaches thereforeneed to be attuned to the role and social outcomes ofICTs.Tenth, circular economy strategies (e.g. waste reductioncycles, closing animal nutrient loops) provide a viablebusiness opportunity to the BoP. However, these busi-ness opportunities are largely dependent on the reductionof agri-business input costs and/or the enlargement ofinput–output ratios [14,17]. While early indications thatcircular economy strategies can support BoPs, furtherresearch is needed to understanding how these strategiescan support inclusiveness.Finally, durable horizontal and vertical linkages are key toreducing social, economic and environmental harm on theBoP. Such harm can relate to the influence and interestsof large(r) companies, and focus on avoiding small pro-ducers being crowded out from new business sectors,innovations and value chain linkages [10,18,22]. Toachieve these vertical and horizonal linkages both clearpublic (state) and private (NGO and corporate CSR-based) governance arrangements will play a key role.www.sciencedirect.comEditorial overview Pouw, Bush and Mangnus 95Figure 1INCLUSIVE AND SUSTAINABLE FOOD SYSTEMSFOOD AND NUTRITIONIMPACTSInclusive Business ofBottom of the Pyramid(BOP)Secondary BusinessProcessBlindspots inPolicy & Practice Enabling Business andGovernment EnvironmentPrimary Business ProcessTertiary Business Process1.2.3.Vulnerable consumersSmall-scaleproducersSmall-scaleentrepreneursCapacity BuildingKnowledge ExchangeConnectionsPolicy & InstitutionalProgrammingFinanceHandling & packagingTransportMarketingManagementCollaborationConsumption of foodcommoditiesProduction of foodcommoditiesBarriers and constraints toeffectively attainviable business,social andenvironmentalvaluesOpportunities andbest practices inproducts and serviceprovisioningAffordable Applicable AccessibleINNOVATIONSCurrent Opinion in Environmental SustainabilityAnalytical framework for assessing food and nutrition impacts of inclusive business from a BoP perspective.A food systems approach to inclusivebusinessWe argue that these key lessons point to the need for anew analytical framework for understanding inclusivebusiness as inclusive food systems. Building on the aboveinsights we identify process of governance and innovationof central importance to realization of BoP inclusivesustainable food systems. The conceptual and theoreticalbuilding blocks of this framework are presented inFigure 1.Processes of innovation are a central focal point under-standing how business processes can be positively trans-formed to impact on food security — in terms of foodaccess, availability, nutrition, and sustainability. From theperspective of the BoP, we argue that innovation need tobe seen as both top down and bottom up developing anddisseminating new ideas, technologies and ways of doing.In any case, a clear focus is needed on ensuring that theseinnovations are ‘triple-A’ — that is affordable, applicableand accessible for the BoP.We also argue that innovation for inclusive food systemsshould be understood as taking place within three distinctstages of the business process. First, primary businessprocesses, which include production and consumption.Second, secondary business processes that includefinance, packaging and handling and packaging, transport,www.sciencedirect.com marketing, management, collaboration. Third, tertiarybusiness processes, including capacity building, knowl-edge exchange, policy and institutional programming,and through connections. It is especially the these tertiaryprocesses that require greater attention, in terms of howthey shape the enabling business and governance envi-ronment in a way that prioritizes the needs of the BoP,facilitates mutual validation of knowledge between theBoP and other stakeholders in the food value chain, andfosters connections and supportive legal, financial andcapacity building connections and collaborations.Both primary and secondary business processes of theBoP, and innovations therein, are currently blind spots inpolicymaking and rarely acted upon. Moreover, theseblind spots limit the vision and scope to identify newopportunities and best practices in service provisioningamidst prevailing barriers and constraints. Yet, linking-upthe primary and secondary business processes of the BoPto tertiary business processes is key to professionalizingand upscaling their food production, consumption andmarketing sustainably and grounded in more inclusiveconditions.ConclusionBusiness and policy actors play a key role in redefining theterms through which BoP producers can be favorablyincorporated into the business of sustainable foodCurrent Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2019, 41:93–9696 Sustainability science: inclusive business: a multi-stakeholder issuesystems. The key lessons and inclusive sustainable foodsystems framework introduced in this paper can be dis-tilled into five key conclusions that can provide guidancefor researchers, policy makers and practitioners movingforward:1) When studying the role of inclusive business by and forthe BoP, it is important to distinguish between BoP asconsumers, producers and entrepreneurs. The realizedfood and nutrition impacts may be different for each.2) The business processes of the BoP, as well as theirrespective barriers and constraints, practical knowl-edge and innovations, are typically a blind spot forpolicymakers and business sector actors. As a result,food quantities, qualities and flows and who gets what,how, when and why, go unrecorded.3) The breakdown of inclusive business processes intoprimary, secondary and tertiary business processes ishelpful to reveal the principal BoP barriers and con-straints to innovation, and identify possible entrypoints for effective engagement with local food secu-rity system actors and organizations4) Innovation for the benefit of the BoP requires triple-Aapproach — that is affordable, applicable and accessi-ble. Top-down scientific innovations need to meet theBoP test of AAA, which can be different for differentBoP user groups.5) Inclusive business moves in steps, and is by no means alinear process. Sometimes, constraints need to beresolved in one domain, before progress can be madein another domain (two steps back, one step ahead).Inclusive business should instead be seen as a dynamic,interactive process that takes into consideration thepractices and relations within the wider food system.Together these insights constitute the core ideas behindthe proposed inclusive food systems framework we haveintroduced. They demonstrate the need for a food sys-tems approach that considers the complex interplaybetween BoP actors and the broader business and gover-nance environment, from which innovation for BoPshould emerge, and synergetic connections and collabora-tions could build-up towards more inclusive and sustain-able food systems.References1. Ros-Tonen MA, Bitzer V, Laven A, de Leth DO, Van Leynseele Y,Vos A: Conceptualizing inclusiveness of smallholder valuechain integration. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2019, 41:10-17.2. Goyal S, Sergi BS, Kapoor A: Understanding the keycharacteristics of an embedded business model for the baseof the pyramid markets. Econ Sociol 2014, 7:26.3. Mitchell RK: Increasing returns and the domain ofentrepreneurship research. Entrepreneurs Theory Pract 2011,35:615-629.Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2019, 41:93–96 4. Lee J, Gereffi G: Global value chains, rising power firms andeconomic and social upgrading. Crit Perspect Int Bus 2015,11:319-339.5. Gupta J, Pouw N: Towards a trans-disciplinaryconceptualization of inclusive development. Curr Opin EnvironSustain 2017, 24:96-103.6. Fressoli M, Arond E, Abrol D, Smith A, Ely A, Dias R: Whengrassroots innovation movements encounter mainstreaminstitutions: implications for models of inclusive innovation.Innov Dev 2014, 4:277-292.7. Pinstrup-Andersen P, Watson DD: Food Policy for DevelopingCountries: The Role of Government in Global, National, and LocalFood Systems. Cornell University Press; 2011.8. Béné C, Oosterveer P, Lamotte L, Brouwer ID, de Haan S,Prager SD, Talsma EF, Khoury CK: When food systems meetsustainability–current narratives and implications for actions.World Dev 2019, 113:116-130.9. Pouw N, Bush SR, Mangnus E: Inclusive business forsustainability. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2019, 41:A1-A4 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2019.12.002.10. Bush SR, Oosterveer P, Bottema M, Meuwissen MPM, Mey YD,Chamsai S, Lien HH, Mohan CV: Inclusive environmentalperformance through ‘beyond-farm’ aquaculture governance.Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2019, 41:49-55.11. Oostendorp R, van Asseldonk M, Gathiaka J, Mulwa R, Radeny M,Recha J, Wattel C, van Wesenbeeck L: Inclusive agribusinessunder climate change: a brief review of the role of finance. CurrOpin Environ Sustain 2019, 41:18-22.12. Hinson R, Lensink R, Mueller A: Transforming agribusiness indeveloping countries: SDGs and the role of FinTech. Curr OpinEnviron Sustain 2019, 41:1-9.13. Mangnus E: How inclusive businesses can contribute to localfood security. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2019, 41:69-73.14. Chia SY, Tanga CM, van Loon JJ, Dicke M: Insects forsustainable animal feed: inclusive business models involvingsmallholder farmers. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2019, 41:23-30.15. Westen AV, Mangnus E, Wangu JM, Worku SG: Inclusiveagribusiness models in the Global South: the impact on localfood and nutrition security. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2019,41:64-68.16. Kos D, Kloppenburg S: Digital technologies, hyper-transparency and smallholder farmer inclusion in global valuechains. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2019, 41:56-63.17. Jonkman NT, Jansen B: Urban soil management ofmarginalized lands: recognizant of history. Curr Opin EnvironSustain 2019, 41:43-48.18. Schouten G, Vellema S: Partnering for inclusive business infood provisioning. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2019, 41:38-42.19. Oostendorp R, van Asseldonk M, Gathiaka J, Mulwa R, Radeny M,Recha J, Wattel C, Wesenbeeck L: Inclusive business for climatesmart agriculture: the role of finance. Curr Opin Environ Sustain2019, 41:18-22.20. Schouten G, Bitzer V: The emergence of Southern standards inagricultural value chains: a new trend in sustainabilitygovernance? Ecol Econ 2015, 120:175-184.21. Speelman EN, Rodela R, Doddema M, Ligtenberg A: Seriousgaming as a tool to facilitate inclusive business; a review ofuntapped potential. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2019, 41:31-37.22. Bijman J, Weijers G: Exploring the inclusiveness of producercooperatives. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2019, 41:74-79.23. Meuwissen MP, Bottema M, Lien HH, Chamsai S, Gebru KM,Mey YD: The role of group-based contracts for risk-sharing;what are the opportunities to cover catastrophic risk? CurrOpin Environ Sustain 2019, 41:80-84.www.sciencedirect.com

Editorial overview : Towards an inclusive food systems approach for sustainable food and nutrition security

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Utrecht University Repository