Dalla Lana School of Public Health

The sustainable food systems’ landscape comprises an extensive repertoire of resources, including approaches, tools, and good practices. Practitioners and policymakers from low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) can find this rich scenario overwhelming and this can sometimes lead to analysis paralysis. Categorizing this overabundance of information in terms of its theoretical background, evaluating its applicability for local contexts, and the most suitable combination of tools and approaches, require technical knowledge, infrastructure, and resources not abundant in LMIC.

This proposal seeks to address the intersection of an overabundance of information supporting the design, implementation and evaluation of interventions within food systems^1234567 and a lack of mechanisms to take advantage of them in places that need it the most. Using a problem-solving lens⁸ and proposing a collaborative approach⁹ this research aims to develop an evidence-informed “smart-toolbox” aimed at policymakers and practitioners working in LMIC. It will facilitate i) navigating the broad repertoire of available resources promoting healthy, equitable, and sustainable food systems, and ii) making an informed decision on its potential adoption in local contexts.

This research will be developed through an empirical case in Medellin (Colombia, Latin America). Medellin is Colombia’s second largest city and is well-known for its industrial development. It is the capital of Antioquia, a state that makes up 13.9% of the country’s economy. Despite its advance in infrastructure and market development, Antioquia is the most unequal state in Colombia.  During the 90ths and amidst the drug cartels war, Medellin was considered one of the most violent places in the world. The city has developed a long recovery process and now is acknowledged by its transformation and openness to innovation.

Alignment of co-benefits and the intersections of Health and Environments through Food Systems Change

Co-benefits are broadly defined here as the various benefits that can be captured through a single measure¹⁰. It implies tackling multiple issues simultaneously¹¹. The umbrella of potential benefits can include climate, economic, environment, social and political and institutional aspects¹².

In this research seeking to develop a “smart-toolbox” that is responsive to both the needs of practitioners and policymakers and the realities of LMIC, the notion of co- benefits is included as a lens to analyze the tools that are identified. In the first phase, a systematic mapping process¹³ is conducted to identify the scientifically inspired tools and resources that are available. In the second phase, this repertoire is categorized using the co-benefits lens and a special consideration of social aspects involved.

The mapping of potential co-benefits will include the direct and indirect connections that the resources identified present within the multiple components of the food system¹⁴. These co-benefits will be nuanced using a power relations lens, essential in the highly unequal LMIC countries. In particular, this proposal will consider three levels suggested by IPES- Food¹⁵ to analyze power relationships, first, intra-household and community levels; second, relationships between farmers, retailers and traders; and third, general governance of the system. In this sense, a consideration of how power is exerted, reinforced and by whom will be at the center. In a similar vein, to consider inclusion, the four aspects to assess inclusion -ownership, voice, risk and reward- proposed by Vermeulen & Cotula¹⁶ will be considered.

Relevant conceptual theories, methodological tools, frameworks, approaches, gender and equity considerations

Spotlight on references:

NRC (National Research Council). Convergence: Facilitating Transdisciplinary Integration of Life Sciences, Physical Sciences, Engineering, and Beyond. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2014.

There are two central ideas at the backbone of this research:  

• Convergence is an inquiry approach advocating for the integration of tools, knowledges, and ways of thinking across disciplines, creating comprehensive frameworks that are problem-solving-oriented¹⁷; 
• Practical and effective collaboration between researchers and policymakers is needed when developing systematic reviews¹⁸.  

This research will be developed through an empirical case in Medellin (Colombia, Latin America), a place with openness to innovation processes¹⁹²⁰, and with experience identifying potential pathways to face the significant socio-environmental challenges affecting their food systems ²¹.  

This research will contribute to the conceptualization of co-benefits in three ways. First, using a curated list of resources, it will map theoretical co-benefits covering climate, economic, environment, social and political and institutional aspects. It will shed light on the relationships between these co-benefits and how they operate together (for example, if they are context-independent or dependent, or prerequisite/optional)²². 

Second, another two interlinked layers will be added to offer a nuance view on co-benefits:  i) power and ii) gender and equity. Gender is defined here as the norms, behaviors and roles associated with being a woman and a man.  These social norms  guiding behavior by women and men are different and exacerbate inequalities and inequities ²³. Equity is based on the idea that people should be treated as equal, in terms of access to life chances, concern on their needs and access to opportunities²⁴.

Drawing from the groups of inequalities on gender and development proposed by Twyman et al²⁵, through the research, gender and equity will be operationalized using the following three aspects: i) gender division of labor (and related time use allocation), ii) access to and control over resources (including physical, financial, information, training, and extension, and food as different types of resources), and iii)  decision-making (sometimes referred to as women’s autonomy or agency but we took a broader approach to look at decision-making more generally). 

These lenses will allow an inquiry on how these co-benefits and their interrelationships would operate for specific communities in unequal territories.  This will be clearer when developing the empirical case, which will offer a specific context to understand power and gender dynamics linked to co-benefits. 

And third, the research will curate a repertoire of resources promoting healthy, equitable, and sustainable food systems with applicability in LMIC contexts. This create a database for researchers wanting to analyze how co-benefits appear when specific tools and approaches are used in other contexts.

Measurement of impact

Spotlight on references:

Lundy M, Amrein A, Hurtado J, Becx G, et al. LINK methodology: a participatory guide to business models that link smallholders to markets. Version 2.0. Cali, Colombia: International Center for Tropical Agriculture, 2014.

The selection of particular metrics on co-benefits will be an outcome of the research itself and are related to the specific type of the resources. Examples of specific types of metrics include targeted aspects within the food system:  how to create inclusive market linkages²⁶, how to measure the professionalization of farmer organizations²⁷, racial equity²⁸, or gender equity²⁹, and how to capture the nutritional quality of food production³⁰.

For example, some potential metrics that can be used in the case of resources to create inclusive market linkages could be:

• More transparency in the process of public purchases represents an increase in income for farmers due to better market exchanges.
• More transparency in the process of public purchases and a diminution in the barriers that female farmers face owning their productive units increase the participation of production commercialized by female farmers.

This research brings together scholars and practitioners working in sustainable food systems and aims to offer a space to conduct rigorous research that is immediately applicable.  Furthermore, when bringing together and facilitating an understanding of several tools pursuing paths for creating sustainable food systems, this research will impact the democratization of knowledge in LMIC.  In particular, this research looks to influence professionals making decisions on food system programs, offering a process supporting their selection of scientifically-inspired tools, considering the further ramifications of its implementation in terms of co-benefits, and its implications in terms of power and equity. These professionals (mainly practitioners and eventually policy-makers) work at different fields and areas within municipalities, such as offices of agriculture, public health and environment.

Challenges/barriers and knowledge gaps that impede shifts towards healthier and sustainable food systems

Spotlight on references:

Sharma G, Bansal, P (Tima). Cocreating Rigorous and Relevant Knowledge.  Academy of Management Journal 2020; Available from: https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.0487

The main challenge for this research is the lack of a culture of collaborative research between academics and practitioners. In the city selected for the empirical case, there exists one experience on developing alliances, but this research pushes these boundaries and requires a close collaboration and a minimum shared understanding of how research is conducted. In this sense, advice and good practices on navigating these collaborations³¹ will be carefully considered and included in this process.