Cited by 50Organic Food and AgricultureRural Development and AgricultureAgriculture, Land Use, Rural Development

Public food procurement from family farming: A food system and social network perspective

Open access
Gaitán-Cremaschi, Daniel, Klerkx, Laurens, Aguilar-Gallegos, Norman, Duncan, Jessica, Pizzolón, Alejandro, Dogliotti, Santiago, Rossing, Walter A.H.·2022·Food Policy

Abstract

There is promising evidence that public food procurement from family farming (PFPF) can serve as a powerful policy instrument in transitions towards more sustainable food systems. Despite the evidence around PFPF, there is lack of systemic and actor-oriented approaches analysing the relational and interactional dynamics among the multiple and diverse sets of actors in PFPF programs. In this paper, we address this gap by presenting an integrative framework that brings together food systems research, innovation studies and social network analysis, to assess the role of actor networks in PFPF. To illustrate the usefulness of the framework, we present the case of public procurement from family farming in Uruguay. We show how the framework has potential to: highlight the composition and diversity of networks of actors in PFPF; unravel individual and network barriers faced by actors in food systems; and, identify how interactions and (intermediary and brokerage) roles of network actors stimulate innovation or block the changes that are needed for PFPF to catalyse the transition towards sustainable food systems.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.foodpol.2022.102325

Cites

65 of 65 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Borgatti, S.P., Everett, M.G., Johnson, J.C., 2013. Analyzing Social Networks. SAGE Publications Limited, London, p. 296.
  2. Borgatti, S.P., Li, X., 2009. On social network analysis in a supply chain context. J. Supply Chain Manage. 45 (2), 5-22.
  3. Latour, B., 2005. Reassembling the Social. Reasembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Netwrok Theory. University Press, Oxford.
  4. Miranda, A., 2018. Public food procurement from smallholder farmers: Literature review and best practices. Working Paper, No. 176, International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth (IPC-IG).
  5. Sabourin, E., Samper, M., Sotomayor, O. (Eds.), 2014. Políticas públicas y agriculturas familiares en América Latina y el Caribe Balance, desafíos y perspectivas. Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, Santiago.
  6. Schneider, S., Thies, V.F., Grisa, C., Belik, W., 2016. Potential of public purchases as markets for family farming: an analysis of Brazilian school feeding program between 2011 and 2014. In: Advances in Food Security and Sustainability 1. pp. 69-95.
  7. Scott, J., 2013. Social Network Analysis, third ed. Sage Publications Ltd, London.
  8. Tommasino, H., Cortelezzi, A., Mondelli, M., Bervejillo, J., Carrazzone, S., 2014. Tipología de productores agropecuarios: caracterización a partir del Censo Agropecuario 2011. In: Anuario 2014. OPYPA. Uruguay. pp. 491-508.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gaitán-Cremaschi, D., Klerkx, L., Aguilar-Gallegos, N., Duncan, J., Pizzolón, A., Dogliotti, S., & Rossing, W. A. H.
Affiliations
  • Wageningen University & Research (NL)
  • Chapingo Autonomous University (MX)
  • Universidad de la República de Uruguay (UY)
Corresponding author
Klerkx, Laurens
Venue
Food Policy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-08
Volume
111
Pages
102325
ISSN
0306-9192 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4289688866
Cited by
50
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 1
FWCI
5.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Food Policy (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • Dipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Greater South Information System
Funders
Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (W 08.250.304)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Organic Food and Agriculture
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Rural Development and Agriculture
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
Keywords
public food procurement, family farming, actor networks, social network analysis, sustainable food systems, food system transformation, innovation, brokerage roles, intermediary role, Uruguay

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review