Search

Many development organizations aim for greater incorporation of farmers into the market; however, global value chain scholars warn that farmers may be adversely incorporated and advise to analyse the terms by which farmers are incorporated. This paper sheds light on the dynamics of value chains by showing how the terms by which farmers are incorporated into the market vary significantly depending on the type of farmer and market. To generate benefits for small farmers’ livelihoods, we urge practitioners to consider the workings of multiple marketing channels and the ways in which farmers of different social classes interact with them.

Evaluation in complex programs assembling multiple actors and combining various interventions faces contradictory requirements. In this article, we take a management perspective to show how to recognize and accommodate these contradictory elements as paradoxes. Through reflective practice we identify five paradoxes, each consisting of two contradicting logics: the paradox of purpose—between accountability and learning; the paradox of position—between autonomy and involvement; the paradox of permeability—between openness and closedness; the paradox of method—between rigor and flexibility; and the paradox of acceptance—between credibility and feasibility. We infer the paradoxes from our work in monitoring and evaluation and action research embedded in 2SCALE, a program working on inclusive agribusiness and food security in a complex environment. The intractable nature of paradoxes means they cannot be permanently resolved. Making productive use of paradoxes most likely raises new contradictions, which merit a continuous acknowledging and accommodating for well-functioning monitoring and evaluation systems.

Small and medium size business enterprises (SMEs) are the linchpin in systems of food provisioning in sub-Saharan Africa. These businesses occupy the middle of the agri-food chain and face a food security conundrum: they must ensure that smallholder producers of limited means can operate under fair terms while low-income consumers are supplied with affordable and nutritious food. This task becomes even more challenging when resources are scarce. This paper explores how resource-constrained SMEs arrange the terms on which both farmers and consumers are included in agri-food chains. To this end, it combines the concept of inclusion with that of frugality. We use the case of a Kenyan SME to demonstrate how a focus on frugality can advance our understanding of how business practices create thriving business relationships with smallholders while simultaneously ensuring access to affordable food for consumers. We additionally identify what conditions for inclusion emerge from this type of dynamic business practices. Our perspective departs from assessing induced organisational interventions, such as contract farming or cooperatives, which deliberately shorten the agri-food chain, thereby overlooking the skilful practices being employed by business actors in the middle of the chain.

Evaluation in complex programs assembling multiple actors and combining various interventions faces contradictory requirements. In this article, we take a management perspective to show how to recognize and accommodate these contradictory elements as paradoxes. Through reflective practice we identify five paradoxes, each consisting of two contradicting logics: the paradox of purpose—between accountability and learning; the paradox of position—between autonomy and involvement; the paradox of permeability—between openness and closedness; the paradox of method—between rigor and flexibility; and the paradox of acceptance—between credibility and feasibility. We infer the paradoxes from our work in monitoring and evaluation and action research embedded in 2SCALE, a program working on inclusive agribusiness and food security in a complex environment. The intractable nature of paradoxes means they cannot be permanently resolved. Making productive use of paradoxes most likely raises new contradictions, which merit a continuous acknowledging and accommodating for well-functioning monitoring and evaluation systems.

The triangle of dairy intensification, commercialisation and market formalisation is promoted to address the challenges of food and nutrition security (FNS) and climate change. This article questions the need for formalisation to reach intensification and commercialisation objectives in Kenya. Moving beyond the binary perception of milk markets as either ‘formal’ or ‘informal’, we investigate a repertoire of milk-collection practices and address the following question: ‘What enables diverse intermediary practices to ensure a consistent flow of milk from grass to glass?’ Sampling, data collection and analysis were guided by a qualitative research design for an empirical exploration of the practices of owner-operated (N = 13) and corporate (N = 4) milk collectors. Iterative analysis of observations revealed three main themes constituting milk-collection practices: (1) buying milk, (2) managing milk (quantity and quality measurement) and (3) selling milk to the next buyer. These practices were enabled and sustained by the diverse options available for each aspect of milk collection, and by the capacity of collectors to accommodate variety in their practices. We invite scholars and practitioners to conduct deeper explorations of how to accommodate events in practice to enhance the success of ambitions relating to FNS and climate change through pathways of intensification and commercialisation.

The method is an integration between practice oriented study and institutional grammar tool that is useful to elicit rules underlying farmer-led collective trading that are usualy unwritten. The article is equipped with steps to elicit unwritten rules and with examples of actual smallholders' collective trading. The integrated method is relevant for researchers or development interventionists in revealing institutional nature of food markets that operate unwritten rules-in-use or a blend of written and unwritten rules-in-use. The data used for analysis this paper is stored in Wageningen University. Due to the sensitivity of the data, the data is not made available for public.

The private sector has become an important partner in development interventions that aim to make market systems more favourable for smallholders and low-income consumers of food. How to evaluate these inclusive business programmes is the central theme of this IDS Bulletin. It presents real-world experiences of practitioners and academics using theory-based evaluation. This introductory article highlights the approaches and methods used to assess systemic change and provide learning for adaptive management. It acknowledges the limits to attributing outcomes to programmes alone and proposes a way to generalise about effectiveness where outcomes are highly contingent on a specific contextual embedding. The article explores the synergy of the iterative reflections on the theory of change, the analytical approach of realist evaluation, and the conceptualisation of changes in firms’ practices as emerging from behaviour systems where the motivations, opportunities, and capabilities of firms are not equally distributed.

Evaluations of private sector development programmes look at what changed to the workings of the system, and whether these changes are scalable, resilient, and sustainable. We present an evaluation lens that primarily qualifies changes to the systemic nature of food provisioning in markets. It converts theoretical frameworks into ‘antennae’ receptive to early signs of systemic effects of inclusive agribusiness that fosters food and nutrition security. The tools for this theory-informed approach were developed and applied in 2SCALE, a Dutch-funded programme aiming to incubate inclusive agribusiness and contribute to food and nutrition security goals in Africa. The article reflects on what to monitor to detect early signs of systemic effects and how monitoring can be embedded in unfolding business and partnering processes. It concludes that taking a theory-informed approach gives directionality to strategising and planning, and enhances capacities of partners in inclusive business projects to lead actions towards realising systemic effects.

The premise of this chapter is that a focus on practices and their relationships opens a methodological space to investigate how a variety of actors or small groups make knowledge work. The chapter contextualises the methodological discussion in global commodity chains and local food markets, which feature a layered organisational set-up and spatially distributed tasks. It offers a methodological perspective which emphasises: (1) the use of knowledge to make situated practices work; (2) underlying processes of coordination emerging from mutually constituting practices distributed in space; (3) the processes configuring externally-induced and knowledge-based interventions with situated practices. This chapter combines literature at the interface between organisation studies, technology studies, and learning studies, using a practice lens to study knowledge as an accomplishment and an essentially social activity. Two case studies substantiate this methodological perspective: pruning in the global commodity chain of cocoa in Ghana; and the practice of aggregating volumes in local food markets for oilseed and edible oil in Uganda. The focus on knowing as emerging from situated practice is appreciative of local problem-solving capacities, and contributes to detecting and opening spaces for inserting these capacities in the specialised knowing generated in mainstream science and technology institutes.

This Research Topic contains a selection of papers dealing with Fusarium wilt of banana (FWB), also known as Panama disease, that investigate (i) the epidemiology, distribution, infection biology, and diversity of the pathogen, (ii) management practices, and (iii) ways to identify and screen for resistance. The Research Topic arose from the increasing spread and the growing global impact of FWB, affecting a wide range of banana production systems worldwide.During the inception of this Research Topic an increased understanding of genetic diversity of Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. cubense (Foc), traditionally considered as the causal agent of FWB, emerged and showed that Foc comprises several different Fusarium species (Ploetz, 2006; Maryani et al., 2019). The so-called Tropical Race 4 (TR4) was found to be genetically distant from other FWB causing species and was described as Fusarium odoratissimum (Maryani et al., 2019).

The Royal Netherlands Society for Agricultural Sciences (Koninklijke Landbouwkundige Vereniging, KLV, founded in 1886) took the initiative to publish the Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science (NJAS) in 1953. In 2002, NJAS broadened its scope and was titled: NJAS–Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences. After 134 years, the general assembly of members decided to dissolve the Society in 2020. The end of the Society will not be the end of its journal. This paper presents a brief history of the Society and the journal, which exposes how the Society’s journal, originally strongly anchored in the plant sciences and agronomic research in the Netherlands, evolved towards an international journal with an increasingly strong interdisciplinary scope. The brief history signifies the crucial role of special issues as a collaborative endeavour and learning environment for making interdisciplinary approaches work.

Context: This article focuses on partnerships working on inclusive development and food security in agri-food chains and agribusiness clusters that may feature institutional arrangements reinforcing inequality or inducing exclusion. Research question: The article develops a theory-driven capacity framework for investigating how intervention strategies related to partnering generate developmental outcomes. Methods: Building on action–research and drawing on complementary literature streams, the framework distinguishes four specific capacities that individually and in configuration contribute to processes of inclusive development triggered by partnering processes. The framework is applied to two case examples targeting inclusive development in agri-food chains and agribusiness clusters in domestic food markets in Benin and Nigeria. Results: Four capacities that enable partnerships to contribute to inclusive development are distinguished: deliberative, alignment, transformative and fitting capacity. Processes of inclusive development emerge from mobilizing and combining these complementary capacities. Capacities emerging in evolving joint actions, negotiations and deliberations in partnering processes generate developmental outcomes, which are not self-evident results of partnerships. Presence of the four capacities propels the partnership’s influence on transforming the terms of inclusion for specific groups. Policy implications: The differentiation of specific capacities embedded in partnering processes contrasts with generic partnership formulas focusing on the formalized and organizational features of partnerships and emphasizing sharing of resources and inputs. For partnerships to make a development impact, new capacities need to be developed and mobilized. This underscores the importance of skilful and experienced facilitators.