IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jenvss/v14y2024i1d10.1007_s13412-023-00854-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Local actors’ perspectives on sustainable food value chains: evidence from a Q-methodology study in Kenya

Author

Listed:
  • Maíra Finizola e Silva

    (University of Antwerp)

  • Sophie Van Schoubroeck

    (University of Antwerp)

  • Jan Cools

    (University of Antwerp
    University of Antwerp)

  • Danstone Ochieng Aboge

    (Jaramogi Oginga Odinga University of Science and Technology)

  • Matilda Ouma

    (Odinga University of Science and Technology)

  • Calleb Olweny

    (Jaramogi Oginga Odinga University of Science and Technology)

  • Steven Van Passel

    (University of Antwerp)

Abstract

Governments and international organizations are increasingly determined to create more sustainable food value chains (SFVCs). However, only little empirical evidence is available on how SFVCs are understood. Enquiring African food value chain actors allows gathering valuable insights into their perception of sustainability, which characteristics of sustainable food value chains they prioritize, and which obstacles to a sustainable transformation they identify. By means of a Q-methodology involving interviews with 33 Kenyan respondents, four perspectives were distinguished. The first perspective, “economic productivity and growth,” prioritizes economic growth and has only limited attention to the social dimension of sustainability. The second perspective, “food security and food availability,” believes that ensuring food security should be the key goal of SFVCs. The third perspective, “environment first,” is dedicated to the environmental dimension of sustainability; the perspective implies that protecting natural resources is the primary way to sustain this level of production. The fourth perspective, “transformative knowledge,” entails that by innovating and sharing knowledge, food value chains can become more sustainable in different areas. Overall, this study provides reliable insights into how Kenyan food value chain actors perceive sustainability in their sector and which elements they believe should be prioritized when rethinking food systems. The study results are valuable for policy-making to further define an SFVC in Kenya and to pave the way for a sustainable transformation of the food sector in developing countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Maíra Finizola e Silva & Sophie Van Schoubroeck & Jan Cools & Danstone Ochieng Aboge & Matilda Ouma & Calleb Olweny & Steven Van Passel, 2024. "Local actors’ perspectives on sustainable food value chains: evidence from a Q-methodology study in Kenya," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 14(1), pages 36-51, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:jenvss:v:14:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s13412-023-00854-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s13412-023-00854-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13412-023-00854-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13412-023-00854-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dirtje Marie Derksen & Dagmar Mithöfer, 2022. "Thinking sustainably? Identifying Stakeholders' positions toward corporate sustainability in floriculture with Q methodology," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(4), pages 1762-1787, December.
    2. Azzurra ANNUNZIATA & Debora SCARPATO, 2014. "Factors affecting consumer attitudes towards food products with sustainable attributes," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 60(8), pages 353-363.
    3. Ching-Hui (Joan) Su & Chin-Hsun (Ken) Tsai & Ming-Hsiang Chen & Wan Qing Lv, 2019. "U.S. Sustainable Food Market Generation Z Consumer Segments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-14, June.
    4. Barry, John & Proops, John, 1999. "Seeking sustainability discourses with Q methodology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 337-345, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vivian Welch & Christine M. Mathew & Panteha Babelmorad & Yanfei Li & Elizabeth T. Ghogomu & Johan Borg & Monserrat Conde & Elizabeth Kristjansson & Anne Lyddiatt & Sue Marcus & Jason W. Nickerson & K, 2021. "Health, social care and technological interventions to improve functional ability of older adults living at home: An evidence and gap map," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(3), September.
    2. Buckwell, Andrew & Fleming, Christopher & Muurmans, Maggie & Smart, James & Mackey, Brendan, 2020. "Revealing the dominant discourses of stakeholders towards natural resource management in Port Resolution, Vanuatu, using Q-method," 2020 Conference (64th), February 12-14, 2020, Perth, Western Australia 305231, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    3. Ágnes Nemcsicsné Zsóka, 2007. "The role of organisational culture in the environmental awareness of companies," Journal of East European Management Studies, Rainer Hampp Verlag, vol. 12(2), pages 109-131.
    4. Zdenka Gyurák Babeľová & Augustín Stareček & Kristína Koltnerová & Dagmar Cagáňová, 2020. "Perceived Organizational Performance in Recruiting and Retaining Employees with Respect to Different Generational Groups of Employees and Sustainable Human Resource Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-23, January.
    5. Elena Zepharovich & Michele Graziano Ceddia & Stephan Rist, 2020. "Land-Use Conflict in the Gran Chaco: Finding Common Ground through Use of the Q Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-16, September.
    6. Latvala, Terhi & Mandolesi, Serena & Nicholas, Phillipa & Zanoli, Raffaele, 2013. "Identifying Expectations for Innovations in Management Practices in Dairy Sector by Using Q Methodology," 2013 International European Forum, February 18-22, 2013, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 164734, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    7. Chaojun Li & Xinjia Huang, 2022. "How Does COVID-19 Risk Perception Affect Wellness Tourist Intention: Findings on Chinese Generation Z," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20, December.
    8. Jaung, Wanggi & Putzel, Louis & Bull, Gary Q. & Kozak, Robert & Markum,, 2016. "Certification of forest watershed services: A Q methodology analysis of opportunities and challenges in Lombok, Indonesia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 51-59.
    9. Greg Munno & Álvaro Salas Castro & Tina Nabatchi & Christian M. Freitag, 2022. "Four Perspectives on a Sustainable Future in Nosara, Costa Rica," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-23, December.
    10. José Alberto Martínez-González & Carmen D. Álvarez-Albelo, 2021. "Influence of Site Personalization and First Impression on Young Consumers’ Loyalty to Tourism Websites," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-17, January.
    11. José Alberto Martínez-González & Eduardo Parra-López & Almudena Barrientos-Báez, 2021. "Young Consumers’ Intention to Participate in the Sharing Economy: An Integrated Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-21, January.
    12. Andrés Lorente de las Casas & Ivelina Mirkova & Francisco J. Ramos-Real, 2021. "Stakeholders’ Perceptions of the Possible Energy Sustainability Solutions in the Hotels of the Canary Islands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-26, June.
    13. Hall, Clare & Sandilands, Victoria, 2006. "Public Attitudes to the Welfare of Broiler Chickens," Working Papers 45998, Scotland's Rural College (formerly Scottish Agricultural College), Land Economy & Environment Research Group.
    14. Patrick Klein & Bastian Popp, 2022. "Last-Mile Delivery Methods in E-Commerce: Does Perceived Sustainability Matter for Consumer Acceptance and Usage?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-27, December.
    15. Clare Hall & Anita Wreford, 2012. "Adaptation to climate change: the attitudes of stakeholders in the livestock industry," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 207-222, February.
    16. Davis, Georgina & Phillips, Paul S. & Read, Adam D. & Iida, Yuki, 2006. "Demonstrating the need for the development of internal research capacity: Understanding recycling participation using the Theory of Planned Behaviour in West Oxfordshire, UK," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 115-127.
    17. Evon Scott & Giorgos Kallis & Christos Zografos, 2019. "Why environmentalists eat meat," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-9, July.
    18. Michał Gazdecki & Elżbieta Goryńska-Goldmann & Marietta Kiss & Zoltán Szakály, 2021. "Segmentation of Food Consumers Based on Their Sustainable Attitude," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-28, May.
    19. Kangas, A. & Saarinen, N. & Saarikoski, H. & Leskinen, L.A. & Hujala, T. & Tikkanen, J., 2010. "Stakeholder perspectives about proper participation for Regional Forest Programmes in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 213-222, March.
    20. Kangas, Annika & Heikkilä, Juuso & Malmivaara-Lämsä, Minna & Löfström, Irja, 2014. "Case Puijo—Evaluation of a participatory urban forest planning process," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 13-23.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:jenvss:v:14:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s13412-023-00854-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.