Determining the transformative potential of circular agriculture initiatives

Policymakers and scientists regard emerging circular initiatives as levers for transformations towards more sustainable food systems. However, it remains unclear how to determine the extent to which circular initiatives have transformative potential. That is, can these initiatives foster a transformation as a result of how they currently bring circularity into practice? In the transformation literature, the characteristics of transformative initiatives are conceptualised in a generic and abstract way. To address this gap, we develop a heuristic of five characteristics for potentially transformative circular agriculture initiatives, which we illustrate with examples of existing initiatives. The heuristic builds on the 'small wins' and circular agriculture literature. Initiatives that hold transformative potential contribute to circular agriculture principles with outcomes that are concrete, in-depth and both technological and social in nature. Additionally, these initiatives faced barriers and overcame them. The heuristic enables policymakers, who call for circular solutions, to identify truly transformative circular initiatives.

Conceptualizing controversies in the EU circular bioeconomy transition

The transition towards a circular bioeconomy (CBE) in the European Union is not without contestation. In particular, research has highlighted potential trade-offs of the large-scale production of bio-resources, for instance with environmental quality goals. To date, however, it remains underexplored in the CBE literature how controversies develop throughout a transition process. To address this gap, this paper explores where controversies are situated in a transition, how they change throughout, and how they influence the transition process. First, we suggest that controversies can be situated on and between different system layers within a transition. Second, we offer an explanation of how controversies evolve, as actors confirm, integrate, disintegrate and polarize underlying storylines. Third, these controversies can have both productive and unproductive outcomes while they unfold throughout a transition. We illustrate this understanding with the example of biorefineries as CBE key technology and discuss a research agenda on controversies in sustainability transitions.

Power to the people? Food democracy initiatives' contributions to democratic goods

In order to foster a transition of the food system toward more sustainable outcomes, scholars have increasingly pointed at the need for organizing strengthened food democracy. By increasing the participation of citizens and food system actors, democratic innovations, such as food policy councils, are believed to promote the quality and legitimacy of food policymaking. However, the question of whether and how food democracy initiatives do indeed contribute to more democratic modes of governance largely remains unexplored. This study addresses this gap by performing a systematic literature review of the existing scholarship on food democracy, assessing democratic innovations for their contributions to four democratic goods: inclusiveness, popular control, considered judgment and transparency. The analysis shows that food democracy initiatives tend to be dominated by organized interests, have more influence on agenda-setting and implementation compared to decision-making, and generally aim for some form of deliberation or knowledge exchange. The precise selection mechanisms, processes and quality of deliberation, and transparency of democratic innovations remain important research gaps. The paper ends with a plea to better connect food democracy scholarship with the broader political sciences, as well as various suggestions for future research.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10460-022-10322-5.

The framing of malnutrition by parliamentarians in Uganda

The quest for political commitment to reducing malnutrition in sub-Sahara Africa draws attention to the role of national parliamentarians. Whereas parliamentarians have the authority to ratify legislation, monitor policies and budgets and transform behaviour, to date little is known about how malnutrition is understood and debated in sub-Saharan African political arenas. This study addresses that gap by exploring how (mal)nutrition has been framed by parliamentarians in Uganda between 2001 and 2017. Applying framing theory we performed a qualitative content analysis of 131 Parliament Hansards transcripts to determine the different meanings of nutrition. Our analysis distinguishes seven co-occurring frames that entail different, sometimes competing, understandings of the drivers and possible solutions of malnutrition. The frames are: (i) the emergency nutrition frame, (ii) the chronic vulnerability frame, (iii) the school feeding frame, (iv) the disease-related frame, (v) the diversification frame, (vi) the overnutrition (among politicians) frame and (vii) the poverty and inequality frame. These frames are sponsored by different groups of parliamentarians, most notably politicians representing constituencies with high degrees of malnutrition, the president, some ministers and politicians in parliamentary forums concerned with children and women issues. Our analysis helps to understand why policy measures get prioritized or disregarded by policymakers. Overall, we show that frame sponsors prioritize short-term tangible solutions, such as food assistance and agricultural inputs, over longer term solutions. We suggest that a more comprehensive policy frame is prerequisite to developing a more effective governance approach to malnutrition in Uganda.