Managing National Food Security in the Global North: Is collaborative governance a possible route forward?

IF 1.9 Q3 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy Pub Date : 2021-06-09 DOI:10.1002/RHC3.12231
O. Larsson, Sarah Sjöqvist
{"title":"Managing National Food Security in the Global North: Is collaborative governance a possible route forward?","authors":"O. Larsson, Sarah Sjöqvist","doi":"10.1002/RHC3.12231","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many countries in the “Global North” that have enjoyed relative food security for a number of decades now face challenges that may lead to disturbances in food supplies. Global markets and global flows are not as self-evident as they were a few years ago and new modes of governance for managing national food security during crisis are required. Recent events such as the COVID-19 pandemic have further showed that global production systems and communications are fragile to a range of different disturbances. This article examines the possibility of managing national food security through collaborative arrangements between public authorities and private food companies through a case study of the Swedish approach to food security. The analysis is based on a theoretical framework that highlights the importance of motivation, leadership, shared understanding, and trust as four dimensions that evaluate collaborative governance in precrisis situations. We conclude that although a broader understnding of the importance of food security has emerged, collaborative governance arrangements run the risk of creating only an illusion of readiness, due to unclear mandates and clear leadership not able to advance trust, legal structures, or concrete agreements for ensuring national food security. © 2021 The Authors. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Policy Studies Organization","PeriodicalId":21362,"journal":{"name":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/RHC3.12231","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/RHC3.12231","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Many countries in the “Global North” that have enjoyed relative food security for a number of decades now face challenges that may lead to disturbances in food supplies. Global markets and global flows are not as self-evident as they were a few years ago and new modes of governance for managing national food security during crisis are required. Recent events such as the COVID-19 pandemic have further showed that global production systems and communications are fragile to a range of different disturbances. This article examines the possibility of managing national food security through collaborative arrangements between public authorities and private food companies through a case study of the Swedish approach to food security. The analysis is based on a theoretical framework that highlights the importance of motivation, leadership, shared understanding, and trust as four dimensions that evaluate collaborative governance in precrisis situations. We conclude that although a broader understnding of the importance of food security has emerged, collaborative governance arrangements run the risk of creating only an illusion of readiness, due to unclear mandates and clear leadership not able to advance trust, legal structures, or concrete agreements for ensuring national food security. © 2021 The Authors. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Policy Studies Organization
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
管理全球北方的国家粮食安全:协作治理是一条可能的前进道路吗?
几十年来一直享有相对粮食安全的“全球北方”许多国家现在面临着可能导致粮食供应紊乱的挑战。全球市场和全球流动不像几年前那样不言而喻,需要在危机期间管理国家粮食安全的新治理模式。最近发生的事件,如COVID-19大流行,进一步表明全球生产系统和通信在一系列不同的干扰面前是脆弱的。本文通过对瑞典粮食安全方法的案例研究,探讨了通过公共当局和私营食品公司之间的合作安排来管理国家粮食安全的可能性。该分析基于一个理论框架,该框架强调了动机、领导力、共同理解和信任作为评估危机前情况下协作治理的四个维度的重要性。我们的结论是,尽管对粮食安全的重要性有了更广泛的理解,但由于不明确的授权和明确的领导无法促进信任、法律结构或确保国家粮食安全的具体协议,协作治理安排有可能只产生一种准备就绪的幻觉。©2021作者。《公共政策中的风险、危害与危机》由Wiley期刊有限责任公司代表政策研究组织出版
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
8.60%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Scholarship on risk, hazards, and crises (emergencies, disasters, or public policy/organizational crises) has developed into mature and distinct fields of inquiry. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy (RHCPP) addresses the governance implications of the important questions raised for the respective fields. The relationships between risk, hazards, and crisis raise fundamental questions with broad social science and policy implications. During unstable situations of acute or chronic danger and substantial uncertainty (i.e. a crisis), important and deeply rooted societal institutions, norms, and values come into play. The purpose of RHCPP is to provide a forum for research and commentary that examines societies’ understanding of and measures to address risk,hazards, and crises, how public policies do and should address these concerns, and to what effect. The journal is explicitly designed to encourage a broad range of perspectives by integrating work from a variety of disciplines. The journal will look at social science theory and policy design across the spectrum of risks and crises — including natural and technological hazards, public health crises, terrorism, and societal and environmental disasters. Papers will analyze the ways societies deal with both unpredictable and predictable events as public policy questions, which include topics such as crisis governance, loss and liability, emergency response, agenda setting, and the social and cultural contexts in which hazards, risks and crises are perceived and defined. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy invites dialogue and is open to new approaches. We seek scholarly work that combines academic quality with practical relevance. We especially welcome authors writing on the governance of risk and crises to submit their manuscripts.
期刊最新文献
“Fight or flight”—A study of frontline emergency response workforce's perceived knowledge, and motivation to work during hazards Unequal burials: Medicolegal death investigation system variation as a determinant of FEMA's disaster funeral assistance allocation Translating global norms into national action. Insights from the implementation of societal security norms in Sweden Innovation and adaption in local governments in the face of COVID‐19: Determinants of effective crisis management Explaining regulatory change in the European Union: The role of the financial crisis in ratcheting up of risk regulation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1