Rethinking Food Systems: A Holistic Path to Sustainability in the Global South

Redacción HC
26/07/2024

As the climate crisis intensifies and economic inequality deepens, the pressure on food systems across low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) has never been greater. These nations—often at the frontlines of food insecurity—face a critical challenge: how to evaluate and transform food systems in ways that are not only sustainable, but also equitable and context-sensitive.

A comprehensive scoping review recently published in PLOS Sustainability and Transformation sheds light on how LMICs are tackling this issue. Led by Estelle Fourat and an international team of researchers, the study analyzes 76 academic papers to assess the holistic approaches currently used to evaluate sustainability in food systems. The review highlights major methodological gaps, geographic imbalances, and a clear need for more inclusive and integrated research.

“Understanding food systems through a single lens—like environmental impact—misses the full picture. True sustainability requires a 360° view,” the authors argue.

This article explores the key findings and implications of the study, offering a roadmap for academics, policymakers, and communities striving to build resilient, just, and sustainable food systems.

Why Food Systems in the Global South Demand a Different Lens

LMICs are disproportionately affected by food-related challenges: climate change impacts, unequal access to nutritious food, fragile economies, and under-resourced public health systems. Yet, much of the academic literature on food system sustainability is biased toward high-income contexts. This creates a knowledge gap that can hinder effective policy design in the very regions that need it most.

“Robust, context-sensitive assessment frameworks are essential to shape interventions that truly serve local populations,” the study notes.

The review set out to map how researchers in LMICs have assessed sustainability—what tools they use, what dimensions they prioritize, and how well these assessments reflect complex realities on the ground.

Three Methodological Approaches: From Data to Dialogue

The 76 studies analyzed were categorized into three distinct research approaches:

1. Observational

These studies rely on quantitative data such as nutrition surveys or land-use statistics. While valuable for descriptive analysis, they often lack depth or context, and rarely capture systemic interconnections.

2. Modeling

These assessments use simulation tools to explore scenarios such as climate impacts or resource flows. They provide insight into system dynamics but tend to overlook social and governance issues, and often lack input from affected communities.

3. Transformative

This emerging category uses participatory methods, including community-based research, stakeholder interviews, and co-creation of solutions. These studies tend to address more sustainability dimensions, offering actionable insights and stronger alignment with local needs.

Notably, 71% of transformative studies incorporated all four sustainability pillars—nutritional, environmental, economic, and social—compared to just 21% of modeling studies.

Key Gaps in Current Research

Despite growing interest in holistic sustainability assessments, the study identified critical limitations across the literature:

• Inconsistent definitions: Only 27 of 76 studies used a theoretical framework such as the HLPE model; many lacked clear definitions of what constitutes a “food system.”
• Limited geographic scale: Most assessments were confined to national level analyses, overlooking important local dynamics that affect food access and nutrition.
• Poor integration of dimensions: Only one in four studies considered all four sustainability pillars, potentially leading to biased or incomplete evaluations.
• Neglect of equity and governance: Key themes like power structures, social equity, and governance mechanisms were often missing—especially in modeling studies.

These gaps are not just academic. They have real-world implications for policymaking, community resilience, and long-term food security.

Why Transformative Approaches Offer the Most Promise

The review highlights that transformative, participatory research is the most comprehensive and context-sensitive method for evaluating food systems in LMICs. These studies incorporate the voices of farmers, consumers, and community leaders, allowing for co-designed solutions that are more likely to be implemented and sustained.

Examples from Latin America and Africa show how local market analysis, food sovereignty principles, and agroecological practices can be integrated into assessments, creating frameworks that reflect real-world complexity and opportunity.

Practical Implications for Policy and Research

The authors propose several recommendations to guide future work:

1. Establish common frameworks: Promote the use of consistent models (e.g., HLPE) to facilitate comparison and improve quality.
2. Encourage multiscale research: Combine national, regional, and local assessments to capture nuances and tailor policies.
3. Promote interdisciplinary literacy: Train researchers in cross-sector methods to bridge health, environment, and social science.
4. Integrate equity and governance indicators: Without addressing power dynamics and social structures, no food system can be truly sustainable.

“Holistic doesn’t mean complex for complexity’s sake—it means inclusive, actionable, and grounded in real needs.”

Toward a Just and Resilient Food Future

The study’s findings are a wake-up call for institutions working to strengthen food systems in LMICs. By prioritizing transformative and inclusive methodologies, governments and NGOs can create policies that respond to both global pressures and local realities.

In a world where climate instability, economic shocks, and inequality are colliding, the future of food security depends on our ability to reimagine how we measure progress.

It’s time to move beyond narrow metrics and embrace 360° assessments—ones that consider not just what we eat, but how it’s grown, distributed, accessed, and governed.

Topics of interest

Health