World Development 175 (2024) 106486
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect 
World Development 
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/worlddev 
Regular Research Article 
Applying the six-dimensional food security framework to examine a fresh 
fruit and vegetable program implemented by self-help groups during the 
COVID-19 lockdown in India 
Jonathan Mockshell a, Thea Nielsen Ritter b,* 
a Research Scientist – Senior Agricultural Economist, International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT), Km 17 Recta Cali-Palmira CP 763537, Apartado Aéreo 6713, 
Cali, Colombia 
b Applied Economic and Impact Evaluation Scientist, International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT), Km 17 Recta Cali-Palmira CP 763537, Apartado Aéreo 6713, 
Cali, Colombia  
A B S T R A C T   
To alleviate impacts of novel coronavirus lockdowns on food security and agri-food value chains, governments implemented various policy responses, yet there is 
limited evidence as to their effectiveness to build resilience in food systems and improve food security. One of these programs was implemented by self-help groups 
(SHGs) in Odisha, India, linking fresh fruit and vegetable (FFV) producers to consumers. This study integrates the concept of resilience into the six-dimensional food 
security framework (food availability, access, utilization, and stability, agency, and sustainability) and applies the framework to examine whether a FFV procurement 
program affected all six dimensions of food security and helped build resilience in food systems. Based on qualitative data from semi-structured interviews and focus 
group discussions, the results show that by enabling SHGs to fulfill the role of value chain actors prohibited from operating during the lockdown, the program had 
positive effects on availability, accessibility, utilization, and stability, with mixed effects on agency and sustainability. Applying the six-dimensional food security 
framework allowed us to show that despite some tradeoffs both across and within the dimensions for various actors, overall the program was able to build more 
resilient food systems. Activating preexisting organizations to reestablish fractured value chains can provide a model to replicate in times of crisis, such as pandemics 
and extreme climate events, when both rural and urban value chain actors can operate only at limited capacity and the public sector is overwhelmed. To accelerate 
the transformation of food systems towards healthier diets and greater resilience to shocks and crises, we recommend strengthening existing and establishing new 
organizations to help respond to crises and future shocks. A multifaceted approach will help ensure that the most vulnerable will not be left behind.   
1. Introduction evidence on how policy instruments implemented by self-help groups 
(SHGs) can shape outcomes to safeguard resilience of value chains and 
Soon after the World Health Organization characterized the novel contribute to food security during crises. 
coronavirus (hereinafter, COVID-19) as a pandemic, food security ex- By examining a government FFV procurement program implemented 
perts forewarned of impacts the pandemic and its associated lockdowns by SHGs that linked producers to consumers in the state of Odisha, India, 
would have on food systems (e.g., Devereux et al., 2020; World Food this study addresses the following research question: In light of the ef-
Programme, 2020) with some predicting stronger impacts on the fects of the COVID-19 lockdown on FFV value chain actors, how did a 
availability and accessibility of fresh fruits and vegetables (FFV) government policy response that utilized SHGs affect the six dimensions 
(Headey & Ruel, 2020; Mogues, 2020; Reardon et al., 2020). During of food security (food availability, access, utilization, stability, agency, 
times of crisis and shocks, policy instruments play a key role in ensuring and sustainability) and build resilience in food systems? To answer this 
access to affordable foods. Ensuring this access not only contributes to question, we apply Clapp et al.’s (2022) six-dimensional food security 
achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, but also helps in building framework. The reason is that applying the six-dimensional food secu-
resilience in food systems and transforming them towards healthy diets rity framework allows us to examine possible synergies and tradeoffs 
(Willett et al., 2019). Despite widespread use of policy response in- between the different dimensions, such as tradeoffs between the tradi-
struments, such as food aid, price supports, cash transfers, and support tional four dimensions of food security and empowerment (Quisumbing 
to producers, to diminish the effects of crisis and lockdowns on agri-food et al., 2021) and sustainability (Meyfroidt, 2018). While other studies 
value chains (Gruère & Brooks, 2021; IFPRI, 2022a), there is limited have applied parts of Clapp et al.’s (2022) six-dimensional food security 
* Corresponding author. 
E-mail addresses: j.mockshell@cgiar.org (J. Mockshell), t.ritter@cgiar.org (T. Nielsen Ritter).  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2023.106486 
Accepted 1 December 2023   
Available online 6 December 2023
0305-750X/© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
J. Mockshell and T. Nielsen Ritter                                                                                                                                                                            W   o  r l d   D  e v  e l o  p  m  e  n  t  1 75 (2024) 106486
framework (e.g., Park et al., 2022), to the best of our knowledge, there activities (Garikipati, 2008; N. Kumar et al., 2021). Members pool their 
have been no previous studies that examine a government program savings, which form a collective fund which is used as a loan to indi-
through the lens of all six dimensions, despite being recommended in the vidual members (Garikipati, 2008). Since established in 1985, they have 
literature (e.g., Alencar et al., 2023). From the review of literature, we spread rapidly throughout India (Fernandez, 2006; N. Kumar et al., 
identified only two studies that analyzed all six dimensions (Vásquez 2021).1 SHGs have been used as a platform to deliver a variety of 
and Andersen (2023) for an NGO community seed bank in northern development programs related to health, nutrition, agriculture, and 
Malawi and Zollet et al. (2021) for responses to the COVID-19 lockdown empowerment (Gugerty et al., 2018; Nichols, 2021). SHG membership 
in Rome, Italy), yet neither examined a government program or policy has been found to lead to a number of beneficial outcomes related to 
response. Our main contribution to the literature is that we integrate the food security, such as food expenditures (Raghunathan et al., 2022), 
concept of resilience into the six-dimensional food security framework nutritional outcomes (N. Kumar et al., 2018), and women’s empower-
and apply the framework to examine whether a FFV procurement pro- ment (N. Kumar et al., 2021). SHGs throughout the state command 
gram implemented during a crisis was able to improve food security much political clout, stemming from their influence in elections through 
among value chain actors based on their connections to preexisting garnering women’s votes, connections which SHG Secretaries and 
groups, namely SHGs, and build food system resilience. The findings Presidents have with political officials at the local level, and encour-
from this study are relevant for other low- and middle-income countries agement of SHG Presidents to run for local office. In this study, we 
where preexisting institutions, such as Rotating Savings and Credit As- analyze the effects of the program based on the social capital of the value 
sociations which have over 1 billion members throughout the world chain actors, specifically membership in SHGs (available to women 
(Sedai et al., 2021), could be activated during shocks. Overall, this study only) and connections to SHGs. 
advances the understanding of resilience of food systems, the role of the Sustainability refers to the ability of food systems to provide food and 
state and civil society in crisis situations, and how policies can have nutrition security in the present, without compromising the ability to 
various effects on value chain actors. generate food and nutrition security in the future (HLPE, 2020). While 
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 pro- Clapp et al.’s (2022) dimension of sustainability focuses on sustainable 
vides the conceptual framework for this study. Section 3 provides the agricultural practices to maintain food systems and support healthy 
context of the study. Sections 4 and 5 present the methods and results, diets in the future, given that our research question examines resilience 
respectively. The results are discussed in Section 6. Concluding remarks in food systems, we emphasize and integrate the concept of resilience in 
are presented in Section 7. food systems into the dimension of sustainability, rather than it being 
another dimension (Zollet et al., 2021). Resilience in food systems is the 
2. Conceptual framework capacity and ability of food systems to deal with future uncertainty, such 
as shocks (Fan et al., 2021; Rotz & Fraser, 2015; Tendall et al., 2015). 
Our intended conceptual contribution is to apply Clapp et al.’s While resilience is integral to sustainability, it is important to note that 
(2022) six-dimensional food security framework to examine how a these two concepts can be diametrically opposed (Hodbod & Eakin, 
program aimed at improving food security during a shock affected 2015). For example, agrochemicals that increase a system’s resilience to 
resilience in the food system. Clapp et al.’s (2022) six-dimensional food pests may have negative repercussions in terms of sustainable agricul-
security framework is an expansion of the traditional four dimensions of tural practices. Given that our research focuses on building resilience in 
food security, namely food availability, access, utilization, and stability food systems during shocks, we did not collect data on sustainable 
(FAO, 2006), to also include agency and sustainability. The framework agricultural practices. 
expands upon the High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Depending on the types of responses actors adopt after shocks, 
Nutrition (HLPE)’s 2020 report which initially proposed the two addi- resilience can be bouncing back or transformational (Folke et al., 2010; 
tional dimensions. While Clapp et al. (2022) only briefly mention Hodbod & Eakin, 2015; van Wassanaer et al., 2021). Béné’s (2020) study 
resilience, we extend the dimension of sustainability to more explicitly on building resilience in local food systems in the context of COVID-19 
integrate the concept of resilience into the six-dimensional food security and other shocks presents three types of responses: harmful, adequate, 
framework. Below, we elaborate on these two added dimensions and on and positive. Harmful responses are negative coping strategies, such as 
how the framework can be applied to examine the effects of a FFV selling productive assets, reducing expenses on health, education, or 
procurement program on food security and resilience in food systems food, and engaging in illegal activities, which could curtail economic 
during an unexpected shock. recovery later (Agarwal, 2021). Adequate responses reduce the risk of 
In the six-dimensional food security framework, agency is the ability mid- or long-term negative consequences while increasing the chance of 
of people to exercise control over their lives and is integral to empow- positive outcomes. Positive responses help actors anticipate, better 
erment (Clapp et al., 2022). Empowerment is the process in which adapt, or mitigate the impact of shocks and can thus help transform food 
people garner the ability to make important life choices who were pre- systems by increasing the accessibility and availability of nutritious 
viously denied that ability and can take the form of bargaining power foods (Béné, 2020). Rather than bouncing back to the state of affairs 
(Kabeer, 1999). Empowerment can generate collective action to reduce before a shock, responses can help actors transform food systems to be 
social inequalities and secure more equitable access to markets (Eyben more resilient in the future. The Government of Odisha has relied on 
et al., 2008). In this study, we examine whether and how a procurement SHGs in the past after natural disasters, such as cyclones, floods, and 
program affected the agency of women SHG members and other value droughts, by utilizing them to distribute aid (Christian et al., 2019; Patel 
chain actors based on their connections to SHGs. Our understanding of et al., 2020). What is unknown, is how utilizing preexisting groups af-
FFV value chains, which are a subset of food systems (IFPRI, 2022b), fects different actors in the value chain. Because of this knowledge gap, 
includes the social embedded nature of the links between different ac- we examine the implications of utilizing SHGs during a shock on 
tors (Gereffi & Korzeniewicz, 1994; Henderson et al., 2002). Social different value chain actors depending on their membership or con-
capital, which consists of social structures and norms (Coleman, 1988), nections to SHGs. 
is thus vital within the understanding of value chains and empower- Uniting the above concepts, building resilience in food systems en-
ment. Given that the procurement program targeted SHG members, we tails adapting and transforming food systems, as well as increasing the 
examine the social capital of different value chain actors: women SHG capacities (such as education, knowledge, savings, empowerment, 
members, those connected to SHG members, and those not connected to 
SHG members. 
SHGs are typically comprised of about 10 to 15 women that meet 1 For a history about microcredit and SHGs in India, we recommend Gar-
regularly and participate in saving, farming, marketing, and lending ikipati (2008). 
2
J. Mockshell and T. Nielsen Ritter                                                                                                                                                                            W   o  r l d   D  e v  e l o  p  m  e  n  t  1 75 (2024) 106486
collective action, and social capital) of individuals, households, and Kendujhar were better off economically and included tribal and non- 
communities to be able to cope with shocks without negatively affecting tribal women, whereas SHGs in Malkangiri included tribal members 
their long-term well-being (Béné, 2020; Fan et al., 2021; Halloran et al., and a mix of refugees from Bangladesh and their descendants. SHGs in 
2020; Tendall et al., 2015). Integrating resilience into the six- the program included people from Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, 
dimensional food security framework (Clapp et al., 2022) allows us to and others, as well as people in the poor and middle income groups. 
utilize the framework to analyze the implications of a specific program As described in Section 2, agency is a critical component of 
on food systems and different value chain actors. empowerment. Given the importance that the Government of Odisha 
places on SHGs, the idea that SHGs promote empowerment, and the 
3. Study context history of using SHGs to placate impacts of shocks there, we apply the 
dimension of agency to examine how a procurement program utilizing 
This section provides context for the study in terms of a brief back- SHGs impacted not only their agency, but that of other value chain ac-
ground on SHGs in India, a description of the FFV value chain in the tors as well. 
study area, and an overview of the lockdown and policy responses in 
India. 
3.2. India’s policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic 
3.1. Self-help groups in the study area The Government of India had a variety of policy responses to the 
COVID-19 pandemic (shown in Figure 2). The timeline focuses on the 
SHGs in the two study sites, the districts of Kendujhar and Malkangiri time leading up to the lockdown and the four phases of the lockdown. In 
(shown in Figure 1), were similar in some aspects, such as their political late March 2020, Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced the world’s 
clout, ages of their members (35 to 60 years), castes, size (10 to 20 most stringent countrywide lockdown just four hours before it became 
members),years of operation (seven to eight years), and governance effective, stating “There will be a total ban of coming out of your homes” 
Each SHG had a President and Secretary and operated under the rules set (Gettleman & Shultz, 2020). Punishments for failing to comply included 
forth by the government. Women managing SHGs had more education fines and imprisonment (Ministry of Home Affairs, 2020a). Trans-
than other members who had some primary education. SHGs in portation was allowed for essential goods only, which were not defined 
Figure 1. Map of districts in the state of Odisha Source: Taken from Maps of India (2022). Notes: The location of the two study areas, the districts of Malkangiri and 
Kendujhar, are circled in red. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.) 
3
J. Mockshell and T. Nielsen Ritter                                                                                                                                                                            W   o  r l d   D  e v  e l o  p  m  e  n  t  1 75 (2024) 106486
Figure 2. Timeline of COVID-19 and government responses in India and Odisha. Sources: Authors’ own illustration based on IFPRI (2022a), Government of Odisha 
(2020a, 2020b), NDMA (2020), and WHO, 2020. 
(Ministry of Home Affairs, 2020a), leading to confusion. The order the quantity of FFV sold in the program: This SHG sold 43,777 kg over 
ceased all commercial establishments with some exceptions, such as 34 days. The program operated for about a month, ending when private 
food shops (Ministry of Home Affairs, 2020a). A month after the lock- traders were allowed to sell FFV. 
down began, the order was amended to allow official markets (mandis) The highly decentralized nature of the program meant that it differed 
to open (Ministry of Home Affairs, 2020b), however, open air markets, by district. For example, the Kendujhar government provided training 
street vendors, and other informal or traditional outlets selling food on how to implement the program and maintain financial records, 
remained banned. A result of the lockdown in India was fractured agri- reimbursed SHGs for hiring trucks to transport FFV from fields to 
food value chains (Agarwal, 2021). In a country where just 10–20 % of collection points, and paid for small trucks to transport FFV from 
food is sold through the modern food sector (Reardon et al., 2020), the collection points to a single designated sales point. Although SHGs in 
lockdown’s mobility restrictions and ban on informal and traditional Malkangiri received implementation support from the government’s 
food outlets severely impacted agri-food value chain actors. Odisha Livelihoods Mission, they did not receive any financial support 
To try to minimize impacts of the lockdown on food security, the or training. To reach customers, SHGs in Malkangiri had to pay for 
government announced new programs, as well as expanded and adapted transportation themselves by renting a rickshaw and driver for 1,000 
existing ones. In late March 2020, the Government of India announced a rupees ($12.38) a day, relying on transport from family members, or 
$22.6 billion package that included providing additional rations of rice, pushing a wooden cart. Prices and sales points also differed in each 
wheat, and lentils through its Public Distribution System, which reaches district. Unlike in Malkangiri where the price was determined by the 
800 million people (Roy et al., 2020). State governments supplemented market, the district government in Kendujhar set the sales price below 
these measures. For example, Odisha provided additional rice, wheat, the market price at that time by 6 rupees ($0.07) per kilogram to help 
and oil (Roy et al., 2020). FFV producers were left with few options: consumers have greater accessibility to FFV. Nevertheless, producers 
Some illegally sold FFV to consumers directly, such as at the backdoor of involved in the program in Kendujhar were able to earn 1–2 rupees 
their homes at night, while most others watched their FFV rot. As a ($0.01–$0.03) more per kilogram because of the government-funded 
result of their plight and pre-existing political ties with government transport. In both districts, the government dictated sales points. In 
officials, SHGs with FFV producers approached government officials to Kendujhar, SHGs were allowed to buy FFV from rural and peri-urban 
seek permission to sell FFV, becoming the impetus for the procurement areas located 10–40 km from the district headquarter and sell FFV at the 
program. District officials designed a FFV procurement program (called district headquarter only, whereas in Malkangiri SHGs could sell in eight 
“Veg on Wheels”) operated by SHGs. rural villages. The program in Kendujhar targeted urban consumers 
While other value chain actors were prohibited from selling FFV, the whereas it targeted rural ones in Malkangiri. Differences in the program 
procurement program gave SHGs permission to buy FFV from producers in the two districts stems from differences in access to funds rather than 
and wholesalers, travel to government designated sales points, and sell differences in political ties of SHGs or the composition of SHGs. The 
FFV. SHGs thus undertook the role of actors in the middle of the value District Planning Office in Kendujhar had more funds for the program 
chain, serving as the link between producers and consumers. compared to that in Malkangiri. In both districts, SHGs did not organize 
Throughout Odisha, 500 SHGs purchased 171 tons of FFV from 1,500 together in the program, such as by combining resources, with the one 
producers to supply popup shops, free kitchens, quarantine centers, and exception of a few SHGs utilizing the same government-funded truck in 
door-to-door sales, reaching 400,000 households (CDRI, 2020). SHGs Kendujhar that was used to transport FFV to the designated sales point. 
self-selected to join the program based on whether they had FFV pro- Instead, SHGs organized and operated on their own. 
ducers and their interest in the program. Just a fraction of the SHGs in 
the study area were part of the program: The program was implemented 3.3. Fresh fruit and vegetable value chains in the study sites before the 
for 34 days by 70 SHGs in Kendujhar (which has a total of 26,240 SHGs) lockdown and during the program 
and for 25 days by 74 SHGs in Malkangiri (which has a total of 5,278 
SHGs). Only one SHG in Kendujhar was able to provide information on Here, we explain how the FFV value chain operated prior to the 
4
J. Mockshell and T. Nielsen Ritter                                                                                                                                                                            W   o  r l d   D  e v  e l o  p  m  e  n  t  1 75 (2024) 106486
lockdown (Figure 3) before showing how it operated during the pro- 4. Methods 
curement program (Figure 4). Before the lockdown, FFV were grown by 
both SHG members and the private sector (non-SHG members). One This section describes the data collection and analysis processes. 
difference between the value chain in the two study sites is that Ken-
dujhar has producer organizations that consist of five to six SHGs. These 4.1. Data collection: Stakeholder interviews 
producer organizations aggregated FFV from their members and then 
sold them to middlemen. Sometimes they also transported FFV to re- To understand the inner workings of the program and how it affected 
tailers. Some large producers (males) sold directly to consumers at the value chain actors and resilience in food systems, qualitative interviews 
market while some small producers (mostly males) sold directly to were conducted in two districts. This method is supported in the liter-
consumers at the roadside. In addition to others, some male relatives of ature to examine resilience in food systems (e.g., Béné et al., 2016). The 
SHG members were active in the middle of the value chain as aggre- sampling procedure began with gathering information about where the 
gators, transporters, and retailers. Wholesalers purchased FFV grown FFV procurement program operated from government officials in Odi-
outside of Odisha, such as potatoes and onions. sha’s capital, Bhubaneswar. Purposeful sampling was applied to select 
Figure 4 summarizes the FFV value chain during the procurement two contrasting districts. As shown in Figure 1, Kendujhar is located 
program. Although designed to benefit women SHG members, the pro- close to Bhubaneswar, has larger markets, borders several other districts 
gram included a variety of other value chain actors, namely very poor in Odisha, benefits from a more extensive highway network, and tar-
producers, male relatives of SHG members (who aggregated, trans- geted urban consumers in the program. Malkangiri is located farther 
ported, and sold FFV), and wholesalers. When the program needed from Bhubaneswar than any other district, has only one national high-
additional FFV, SHGs prioritized very poor FFV producers since they way running through it, and targeted rural consumers in the program. 
were aware that these producers had no other means to legally earn Our qualitative data consists of semi-structured interviews (SSIs) and 
income. Value chain actors participated in the program if they were SHG focus group discussions (FGDs) that were conducted in August 2021 (see 
members, male relatives of SHG members, or were approached by a SHG Table 1 for a breakdown of the interviews). Interviews were conducted 
to be a part of the program. FFV were transported directly to collection in the capital of Odisha (Bhubaneswar), 14 villages and six cities in 
points by producers (Malkangiri) or transporters (Kendujhar). This Kendujhar and Malkangiri districts, and Cuttack city in Cuttack district. 
variation is due to a difference in the program in the two districts SSIs and FGDs were conducted in the local language by four trained 
(explained in Section 3.2): SHGs in Kendujhar were reimbursed for enumerators and one field team leader familiar with the local context. 
hiring trucks, but those in Malkangiri were not. At collection points, All interviews were recorded with participant consent and COVID-19 
private sector aggregators, SHG members, and male relatives of SHG protocols were adopted to ensure the safety of enumerators and re-
members aggregated, weighed, and graded FFV, which were then spondents. Purposeful sampling was applied in selecting respondents to 
transported to sales points by male relatives of SHG members and pri- acquire perspectives from all types of FFV value chain actors and a range 
vate sector actors. Private sector wholesalers sold supplementary vege- of state- and district-level government officials. Thus, in selecting re-
tables grown outside of Odisha (onions and potatoes) to retailers (male spondents, the qualitative principle of completeness (covering a broad 
relatives of SHG members and other vendors in the program). This was spectrum of actors) and dissimilarity (respondents with diverse per-
done to attract consumers and increase access to these staple foods, spectives) was applied (Blee & Taylor, 2002). 
which were largely unavailable during the lockdown due to mobility In total, 63 SSIs, each lasting 1–2 h, were conducted with govern-
restrictions. Some SHG members in Malkangiri accompanied the hired ment officials, a local NGO, SHG members involved in the program, and 
driver to sell FFV because the travel distance was less than in Kendujhar. value chain actors both involved and not involved in the program. A mix 
FFV that did not sell by the end of the day were donated to the poor or of value chain actors (producers, aggregators, transporters, wholesalers, 
distributed back to SHG members. and retailers) were interviewed of which about one-third were retailers 
and one-quarter were producers. Most value chain actors interviewed in 
Figure 3. Fresh fruit and vegetable value chain before the lockdown. Source: Focus group discussions. Notes: SHG is a self-help group.  
5
J. Mockshell and T. Nielsen Ritter                                                                                                                                                                            W   o  r l d   D  e v  e l o  p  m  e  n  t  1 75 (2024) 106486
Figure 4. Fresh fruit and vegetable value chain in the procurement program Source: Focus group discussions. Notes: SHG is a self-help group.  
the SSIs were in the vegetable business (43) of which one-third also 
Table 1 transacted fruit. The majority had small businesses without employees. 
Stakeholder interviews.  Informal conversations were held with about 50 consumers at outdoor 
Interviews Number Information collected markets to gain additional insights. As the number of respondents active 
Semi-structured interviews (n ¼ 63) in each value chain activity is relatively small, there are limitations of 
State-level 3 Creation, design, and specifics drawing inferences from the sample to value chain actors who were not 
officials in of the program. interviewed. However, the goal of this study is to provide insights from a 
Bhubaneswar 
District-level officials Implementation and specifics case study of a program implemented during a crisis, rather than draw 
Kendujhar 4 of the program. Impacts of the statistically significant results. 
Malkangiri 4 lockdown on FFV value chains. The SSI approach utilized a mix of multiple choice and open-ended 
SSIs with SHG members who were part of the Involvement in the FFV value questions without prompting respondents (Roe, 1994). Respondents 
procurement program chain, impacts of the lockdown were asked about: their FFV business (such as the years in the business, 
Kendujhar 10 (8 producers, 2 others on FFV value chains, self-help 
who supported the group dynamics, and types of goods, employees, markets); the effect of the lockdown on FFV 
program) involvement in the program markets, value chain actors, food security, and SHGs; responses to the 
Malkangiri 10 (5 producers, 1 Involvement in the FFV value lockdown; and the FFV procurement program. Open-ended questions 
aggregator, 1 producer/ chain, impacts of the lockdown allowed respondents to share their experiences during the lockdown 
aggregator, 3 others who on FFV value chains, self-help 
supported the program) group dynamics, and about food security and the FFV value chain, which led to a richer 
Value chain actors who were part of the involvement in the program dataset. Follow-up questions pursued understanding and allowed topics 
procurement program to be further explored. In addition to the SSIs, we conducted FGDs. Two 
Kendujhar 8 (2 aggregators, 1 FGDs in each district were held with SHG members and male relatives 
aggregator/retailer, 2 who were part of the program (participants were mostly women). In 
wholesalers, 1 transporter, 
1 transporter/retailer, 1 addition, one FGD in each district was held with value chain actors who 
retailer) were not part of the program (participants were mostly men.) The re-
Malkangiri 10 (3 transporters, 2 small spondents differed from those in the SSIs. Each FGD had between five 
retailers, 3 aggregators, 2 and twelve participants and lasted about two hours. FGD questions were 
small aggregators/retailers) 
SSIs with FFV value chain actors who were not Involvement in the FFV value based on the following topics: effects of the lockdown on FFV value 
part of the program chain, impacts of the lockdown chain actors, SHGs, and food security; responses to the lockdown; 
Kendujhar 7 (2 small, 1 medium, and 2 on FFV value chains, and whether impacts and responses depended on value chain actors’ char-
large retailers; 2 reactions to the procurement acteristics; government support during the lockdown; and the procure-
wholesalers) program ment program in terms of how it was implemented and its impact on 
Malkangiri 5 (4 small retailers, 1 
medium retailer) value chain actors, SHG members, and community members. As with the 
Cuttack 2 (2 large wholesalers) SSIs, follow-up questions were asked to allow topics to be explored in 
Focus group discussions (n ¼ 6) more detail. At the end of each FGD, participants collectively mapped 
Focus group discussions with SHG members and Impact of the lockdown and FFV value chains. 
relatives who were part of the program procurement program on FFV 
Kendujhar 2 value chains and food security. 
Malkangiri 2 Value chain mapping. 
Focus group discussions with value chain actors 4.2. Data analysis: Coding of transcripts 
who were not part of the program 
Kendujhar 1 SSIs and FGDs were analyzed separately. From the SSIs, open-ended 
Malkangiri 1 questions were translated and transcribed while multiple-choice ques-
Source: Authors’ compilation. tions were tabulated in Excel. Value chain actors were categorized ac-
Note: About 50 informal conversations were held with consumers in Kendujhar cording to whether they were involved in the fruit and/or vegetable 
and Malkangiri. chain, what type of value chain activity they were involved in, and 
whether they participated in the procurement program. This allowed us 
6
J. Mockshell and T. Nielsen Ritter                                                                                                                                                                            W   o  r l d   D  e v  e l o  p  m  e  n  t  1 75 (2024) 106486
to analyze answers to the multiple-choice questions based on different (2020) framework to code the responses. Ripple effects were coded 
characterizations of respondents. Audio recordings from the FGDs were when respondents spoke of a disruption in the value chain that impacted 
transcribed and uploaded into NVivo software (Release 1.5.1). The others (Dolgui et al., 2018). Based on our conceptual framework, food 
methods of thematic and content analysis (Mockshell & Birner, 2020; security was coded based on the FAO’s (2006) four dimensions of food 
Braun & Clarke, 2006) were used to examine the FGD transcripts. The security – food availability, access, utilization, and stability – and the 
main research question guided the content analysis. two additional dimensions proposed by Clapp et al. (2022), namely 
To ensure inter-coder reliability and that the themes arising from the agency and sustainability. 
discussions were thoroughly captured, there were three rounds of cod-
ing by two independent researchers who held frequent discussions 5. Results 
throughout the coding process. During the first round, each coder 
created a list of codes based on themes that arose from the transcripts. This section presents themes and quotes from the FGD transcripts as 
Afterwards, the two coders together developed a master list of codes. In well as quotes and basic statistical analyses from the SSIs. The results are 
the second round, codes from the master list were independently applied structured around the main research question, namely, in light of the 
to the transcripts. To create a final list, the coders met again to discuss effects of the lockdown on FFV value chain actors (Section 5.1), how did 
additional codes that arose. In the third round, the final list of codes was a government policy affect the six dimensions of food security (food 
applied. After the third round, Kappa coefficients, which denote the availability, access, utilization, stability, agency, and sustainability) and 
level of agreement between coders, ranged from 0.903 to 1, indicating build resilience in food systems (Section 5.2)? 
an “almost perfect” strength of agreement between the two coders 
(Landis & Koch, 1977: 371). Lastly, the two coders reviewed the tran- 5.1. Effects of the COVID-19 lockdown on FFV value chain actors 
scripts together to discuss any discrepancies. As a result of the above 
process, a total of 24 themes were coded 882 times. To understand how the procurement program affected value chain 
Themes that arose from the transcripts focus on value chain actors, actors’ food security, we must first examine how these actors were 
food security, policies, responses to the lockdown, and ripple effects. affected by the COVID-19 lockdown before the program was imple-
The FGDs were divided into FGDs with SHG members involved in the mented. The interviews and FGDs revealed that no value chain actor was 
program and FGDs with value chain actors who were not involved in the spared from the lockdown. Figure 5 displays responses from the SSIs 
program. Responses to the lockdown were coded based on Béné’s (2020) when FFV value chain actors were asked about how the lockdown 
concept of harmful, adequate, and positive responses that actors can affected different value chain actors. Producers faced difficulties 
adopt in response to shocks (described in Section 2.) We applied these obtaining inputs and selling vegetables, as well as suffered from 
three categories to value chain actors’ responses based on their per- increased post-harvest losses due to distress selling, lack of demand, lack 
ceptions. In case their perception was not clear, we applied Béné’s of storage, and mobility restrictions. For example, a producer in 
Figure 5. Effect of the lockdown on value chain actors. Source: Semi-structured interviews with 48 value chain actors. Respondents who did not know of impacts on 
the fruit value chain were excluded from responses pertaining to fruit value chains. 
7
J. Mockshell and T. Nielsen Ritter                                                                                                                                                                            W   o  r l d   D  e v  e l o  p  m  e  n  t  1 75 (2024) 106486
Kendujhar said, “We sold our vegetables in (our) village, but not all “(consumers) were buying whatever was available in their area: some-
vegetables were sold. More vegetables got rotten – wastages. We times rotten green leafy vegetables. No fresh vegetables.” The program 
couldn’t earn income. We didn’t harvest all vegetables. Our food choices was thus able to link fresh produce to consumers. 
were reduced.” FFV transporters were also impacted by mobility re-
strictions: A value chain actor in Malkangiri said, “Transporters stopped 5.4. Access 
the business of transporting goods. They had no permission to go out. No 
labor for loading and unloading the produce. Workers didn’t come to The program was able to increase access to FFV. When asked to 
work from fear of Covid.” Moving down the value chain, vendors had describe the major successes of the program, almost one-third of the SSI 
difficulty selling FFV due to mobility restrictions, leading to more losses. respondents said that it increased access to nutritious foods. This was 
Some small vendors were still able to sell FFV by hiding from the au- achieved through a number of mechanisms. First, participating value 
thorities. A value chain actor in Kendujhar said, “Small vendors woke up chain actors were able to earn income through the program at a time 
early in the morning – no police patrolling, traveled to near villages, did when other means to earn income were very limited. As shown in 
some business (sold vegetables). In the late evening, they also traveled to Figure 4, participating actors were SHG members, male relatives of SHG 
nearby villages – less police patrolling. Large vendors didn’t do any members, and other value chain actors not connected to SHGs, such as 
business.” Lack of cold storage facilities exacerbated impacts from the very poor producers. Actors in the middle of the value chain emphasized 
lockdown and left value chain actors with little choice but to watch FFV that the program was their only legal means to earn income. In the SSIs, 
rot. The above shows the devastating effects the lockdown had on pro- nearly three-quarters of participating value chain actors reported they 
ducers and actors in the middle of the value chain. were able to earn more income than they would have otherwise. In 
At the end of the value chain, the lockdown negatively affected food addition, one-third said they were able to reduce their business losses. 
security, which led value chain actors to adopt a variety of responses, SHGs that were very active in the program earned profits of up to 60,000 
which we describe based on Béné’s (2020) concept of harmful, rupees ($725) during the month the program operated. In the FGDs, 
adequate, and positive responses. In the SSIs, all value chain actors said some producers reported that although the program didn’t result in high 
that FFV availability decreased during the pandemic with the main profits for them, they were able to recuperate farm expenditures and 
culprit being travel restrictions. People were unable to afford a diverse therefore avoid losing money. For example, a SHG member said, 
diet, with some eating only rice, potatoes, and onions. Value chain ac- “(Before the program) there was no flow of income into our household. 
tors expressed loss of agency as a result of the lockdown: They felt like This dragged us to live a miserable condition. Through the program, we 
they didn’t have control over their lives given the wide, sweeping could sell some fruits and vegetables.” Second, the program enabled 
lockdown order. A value chain actor in Kendujhar said, “It was a very consumers to have daily access to vegetables at a reasonable price. 
difficult situation. The sudden declaration of the lockdown had a very Third, very poor consumers were given free FFV, which increased access 
severe impact on our business. We couldn’t do anything.” The most for the most vulnerable households. There were thus a variety of ways in 
common response to the lockdown among producers, vendors, and re- which the program increased access to FFV. 
tailers was to sell FFV to consumers directly via a motorbike or cart by 
connecting with customers on mobile phones. Harmful responses 5.5. Utilization and stability 
included falling into bankruptcy, reducing dietary diversity, selling as-
sets to buy food, and breaking the lockdown order to sell FFV. Illegal Although utilization was not frequently discussed, some value chain 
trading was considered a harmful response since it made actors sus- actors spoke of having to eat rotten vegetables before the program, 
ceptible to enforcement mechanisms, such as fines and imprisonment, whereas they were able to access clean and fresh vegetables through the 
which – as described in our conceptual framework – could further program. Since the program was able to provide a constant supply of 
deplete assets. Adequate responses adopted by value chain actors FFV to consumers, it stabilized FFV prices and quantities, contributing to 
include diversification, selling vegetables directly to consumers stability. For example, a district-level official in Kendujhar said, “Due to 
(without mentioning having to evade police), receiving support from regular selling of vegetables in the district headquarter, this brought 
SHGs or producer groups, and adopting measures to reduce the spread of stabilization in the vegetable quantity available in the district head-
COVID-19. Participants did not mention any positive responses adopted quarter market.” In remote areas in Malkangiri, the program enabled 
before the procurement program began. Now that we understand the consumers to buy FFV that had previously been unavailable, such as 
situation of value chain actors during the lockdown before the pro- staple vegetables (potatoes and onions) grown out-of-state, due to the 
curement program began, we can turn to the effects of the program on lockdown’s travel restrictions. Urban consumers in Kendujhar were also 
the six dimensions of food security. able to access FFV through the program that had previously been un-
available due to travel restrictions blocking FFV from entering urban 
5.2. Effects on the six dimensions of food security areas. 
In this subsection, we describe the effects of the program on the six 5.6. Agency 
dimensions of food security, beginning with the first four traditional or 
FAO’s (2006) dimensions before exploring the dimensions of agency and Results show that the program’s effects on agency were mixed. The 
sustainability. Based on our conceptual framework, we integrate the program was created as a result of SHGs’ linking social capital, namely 
aspect of resilience in food systems in the last dimension. by providing input into the governance process by asking government 
officials for permission to sell FFV during the lockdown. The program 
5.3. Availability expanded value chain actors’ ability to exert more control over their 
own financial circumstances by being able to earn income through the 
Given that FFV were largely unavailable before the program began, program. The ability of value chain actors to earn income in the program 
the program greatly increased availability. Consumers in rural (Mal- came at a cost: SHG members and male relatives expressed concern 
kangiri) and urban (Kendujhar) areas benefited from the program about increased exposure to COVID-19 from the program, yet also 
because the program led to a continuous supply of FFV when informal emphasized their need to earn income. Thus, while the program allowed 
and traditional markets and non-SHG members were banned from individuals and groups to exercise a greater degree of control over their 
transacting FFV. The program positively affected food availability since circumstances by getting permission to sell FFV, participants felt less 
it allowed sufficient quantities of high quality FFV to be sold daily to control over decisions regarding their health. SHG members in Mal-
consumers. Before the program, one value chain actor said, kangiri observed that the program increased collective action and a 
8
J. Mockshell and T. Nielsen Ritter                                                                                                                                                                            W   o  r l d   D  e v  e l o  p  m  e  n  t  1 75 (2024) 106486
feeling of group solidarity among its members due to the time spent First, the program showed how preexisting groups can be utilized 
together coordinating the program. For example, in one SHG, about ten during crises to efficiently implement a program. In the SSIs, about half 
members met every evening to calculate their net profit, pay producers, of respondents reported that a major success of the program was that it 
and discuss plans for the following day. A feeling of more solidarity in mobilized the group effort of SHGs and over one-third said that the 
SHGs was also expressed due to SHGs helping their communities by program could be quickly implemented because of the already existing 
sourcing from poor producers, donating to poor consumers, and filling SHGs. Having groups in place before disasters strike is important. A 
gaps in the value chain through the program. The results thus uncovered district-level official in Kendujhar elaborated on this by saying, “SHG 
both positive and negative effects on participating actors. members can easily have available support from the government in an 
We also uncovered some gendered effects of the program. Women organized manner.” The program highlighted the importance of social 
were prevented from playing a more active role in the middle of the capital – a key part of food systems according to our conceptual 
value chain, namely in the transport and retailing of FFV, due to social framework – that existed before the program, namely membership in 
norms. Women producers were discouraged from leaving the village, SHGs and the associated political benefits this entailed. Nearly all re-
which was due to a myriad of reasons, such as that it would encourage spondents involved in the program said that when a crisis occurs in the 
gossip, that women would not be able to handle the high outdoor tem- future, they would want the program to be implemented again. There is 
peratures, and that women needed to care for young children. These a good chance this will happen: Seven of the eight district-level officials 
concerns were more prevalent in Kendujhar since producers were said the program would be implemented again when value chains are 
located up to 50 km away from the sales point, whereas in Malkangiri disrupted in the future. 
some women SHG members accompanied the driver to sell FFV since the Second, the program was able to increase the ability of participating 
travel distance was much shorter. In addition, women were regarded as value chain actors to cope with future shocks by increasing their ca-
having less bargaining power than men. Men feared that women pacities, such as education, savings, collective action, and social capital, 
wouldn’t be able to manage customers, handle money, and that they to cope with shocks. As part of the program, SHG members in Kendujhar 
would get cheated by customers. However, program participation received training on how to maintain financial records, which improved 
increased bargaining power for some SHG members. For example, SHG their ability to conduct business after the program. The program also 
members in Kendujhar said that they felt they had more bargaining created new business opportunities by expanding SHGs’ contacts. For 
power because of the training they had received and that their political example, after the program, more traders from other districts traveled to 
ties improved. Kendujhar to buy FFV from SHGs. The program also increased savings, 
The program had negative effects on the agency of some value chain which led to new business ventures – such as a shoe and plate-making 
actors, particularly retailers, who were not part of the program. These business – and increased the financial capacity of participating house-
actors felt ignored by the government and at the whim of the lockdown’s holds to cope with future shocks. 
effects on their livelihoods. In Kendujhar, some FFV retailers who were While SHG members and others who participated in the program 
illegally selling FFV had to lower their prices to compete with the pro- were able to build resilience to future shocks, value chain actors not 
gram. In addition, other retailers couldn’t sell FFV at their usual sales connected to SHGs were unable to do so. This is because the government 
points because of competition from the program, so they had to travel did not grant these value chain actors permission to transact FFV. The 
farther to make sales. While this put them at greater risk of fines and disadvantages non-SHG members faced compared to SHG members 
imprisonment, these retailers were already risking these negative re- were frequently discussed. Value chain actors not in the program re-
percussions since they were defying lockdown orders by selling FFV ported that they received no support from the government during the 
without permission. Value chain actors not connected to SHGs expressed lockdown other than general food rations. A value chain actor in Ken-
resentment towards the program and felt abandoned by the government. dujhar said, “Whoever was doing farming individually or alone suffered 
During one FGD with value chain actors in Kendujhar not involved in the more than producers linked to SHGs… If there is any loss, SHG members 
program, when asked if they received any government support, they distributed it among themselves. In the case of individual producers, 
nearly all replied at once that they didn’t get any support: “No one is they were solely responsible for their losses.” Another said, “SHG 
listening to us.” Compared to other value chain actors, this negative members have access to loans. Individual farmers didn’t get any support 
effect of the program on agency did not affect non-SHG producers as – more losses for individual farmers.” SHG members were aware of this 
much since they were able to sell through the program when SHGs disparity. A SHG member in Malkangiri said, “Individual (non-SHG) 
needed more supply, which was often the case. The interviews also farmers didn’t get any support like us to earn income.” These results thus 
revealed that SHG members were not from the poorest, most vulnerable exposed the importance of value chain actors being organized or at least 
households in the villages. connected to SHGs. 
5.7. Sustainability 6. Discussion 
As described in our conceptual framework, the sustainability In this section, we discuss the results by examining the wider policy 
dimension of food security includes the concept of resilience in food implications and highlighting how they contribute to the emerging ev-
systems. As explained in our conceptual framework, given that our idence on building resilience in food systems and the role of civil society 
research question focuses on how the program affected food system in crisis situations. 
resilience, we integrated and emphasized the concept of resilience in 
food systems in the sustainability dimension, rather than focusing on 6.1. The need for cold storage infrastructure to reduce food loss 
sustainable agricultural practices and reduced food loss as in Clapp et al. 
(2022). Nevertheless, we uncovered a few ways in which the program Although the procurement program reduced FFV losses compared to 
improved sustainable agriculture. The SSIs revealed that nearly two- before the program rolled out, FFV losses would have been even lower 
thirds of participating value chain actors reported that the program had there been access to cold storage. Inadequate cold storage is not a 
reduced FFV waste, which was a significant problem during the lock- problem specific to Odisha (e.g., Van Hoyweghen et al., 2021 for Senegal 
down. In addition, SHG members in Kendujhar credited their receiving a during COVID-19) or the pandemic. FFV have the highest waste of any 
solar-powered cold storage facility for FFV after the program ended as a agricultural product in India (MOFPI, 2022) and inadequate storage 
result of their improved political ties from the program. Below, we leads to one-sixth of FFV being wasted there (Mahajan & Tomar, 2020). 
discuss several ways how the program contributed to the concept of Worldwide, FFV and root crops have the highest food loss and waste of 
resilience in food systems within the dimension of sustainability. any agricultural product, ranging from 40 to 50 % (FAO, 2015) and are 
9
J. Mockshell and T. Nielsen Ritter                                                                                                                                                                            W   o  r l d   D  e v  e l o  p  m  e  n  t  1 75 (2024) 106486
estimated to contribute to 44 % of total food losses and waste (Lipinski connected to organizations should therefore balance those that do. In 
et al., 2013). Continued government support to build solar-powered FFV addition, there may be varying benefits within organizations them-
cold storage infrastructure would help build ideal food systems by selves. For example, we found that poorer members and those with less 
allowing the system to be sustainable as well as more nutrition- and education took a less active role in the procurement program, which 
health-driven (Frank et al., 2019; IFPRI, 2022b). supports findings that poorer farmers are less active members in SHGs 
(Nichols, 2020). Moreover, collective action problems in organizations 
6.2. The importance of social capital (Wouterse & Faye, 2020) and repercussions from encouraging value 
chain actors to join organizations given local power dynamics must be 
The results clearly demonstrated the importance of social capital for considered (Grabs & Carodenuto, 2021). 
participating value chain actors. The only legal means in which informal 
value chain actors could transact FFV during the lockdown was a gov- 6.3. The program’s effects on agency 
ernment supported procurement program, which existed only because of 
political ties between SHGs and government officials and the social The procurement program increased the agency of participating SHG 
structure provided by SHGs. These connections are a form of linking members by increasing their empowerment through improving their 
social capital, which involves relationships between people who interact collective action, bargaining power, and social status. The program 
across formal or institutionalized power in society (Szreter & Woolcock, generated collective action through a number of avenues: increased time 
2004). Similar to our findings, high levels of linking social capital have spent together, working towards a common goal, expanding business 
been found to be a necessary requirement for layering activities, such as skills as a group, and receiving positive feedback from government of-
additional programs, on SHGs (Nichols, 2021). In addition, previous ficials and consumers. Our finding that social capital enhanced collec-
studies have found that women’s groups increase women’s political ties tive action for SHG members is supported by the literature in terms of 
and political empowerment (e.g., Agarwal, 2018, 2019, 2021; Kabeer theories linking social capital and collective action (Ostrom & Ahn, 
et al., 2011, 2019; Swain & Wallentin, 2012). We found that social 2007) and findings on how SHGs can achieve positive nutritional im-
capital (especially linking social capital), rather than financial capital, pacts via cross-cutting pathways (N. Kumar et al., 2018). SHG members 
was more important for value chain actors’ ability to cope with shocks – who participated in the program said that they felt that they had more 
and thus the resilience of the food system – for producers organized into bargaining power as a result of the program, which supports findings 
SHGs and value chain actors connected to SHGs. This contrasts with that increased participation by women in value chains improves their 
Béné et al. (2020: p.809) who write, “The current evidence suggests that relative bargaining power (Pandey et al., 2021). As in our study, others 
for producers, financial/assets and to a lower extent social capitals are have found that SHGs increase women’s empowerment, confidence, 
key in this resilience process.” Nevertheless, the importance of social ability to solve problems, and participation in decision-making and 
capital during the COVID-19 lockdown is supported by research on the public issues (Baishya et al., 2020; N. Kumar et al., 2019, 2021; 
influence of solidarity groups and collective organizations during the Mohanty, 2015; Mohapatra & Sahoo, 2016), all of which are relevant for 
pandemic, such as in exchanging goods (Puerta Silva et al., 2020) and building resilience in food systems (Béné et al., 2020; Halloran et al., 
reaching consumers in localized food systems (Córdoba et al., 2021; 2020; Tendall et al., 2015). 
Zollet et al., 2021). We found that SHG members demonstrated a civic- SHGs’ participation in the FFV procurement program led to a few 
based approach by donating FFV to poor consumers and buying FFV outcomes that may hinder or at least not advance some aspects of 
from poor non-SHG member producers. Similarly, during Italy’s COVID- women’s empowerment. This supports previous studies which found 
19 lockdown, Solidarity Purchasing Groups in Rome raised funds for polarizing effects of microcredit on women’s empowerment (e.g., Gar-
FFV donations to poor consumers (Zollet et al., 2021). Social capital thus ikipati, 2008; Goetz & Gupta, 1996; Kabeer et al., 2019). First, we found 
contributed to the creation, efficient implementation, and benevolence that in the program, male relatives of SHG members were largely 
of participating actors in the procurement program. responsible for activities in the middle of the value chain that generally 
Given our finding that the preexisting organization of producers into accrue more income (Yi et al., 2021). This was in part due to mobility 
SHGs was critical for the creation and efficient implementation of the restrictions imposed on women through social norms, such as the belief 
program during a shock, we recommend that policymakers should that only poor women leave the home to work. Previous studies have 
encourage value chain actors to join organizations, such as SHGs, pro- also found that women face mobility restrictions from social norms 
ducer organizations, and other value chain actor organizations, such as (Agarwal, 2010, 2018; Kabeer, 2001; Kabeer, 2017; Kabeer et al., 2019; 
roadside vendor associations. In addition to building resilience in food Senapati & Ojha, 2019). For example, Kabeer et al. (2019) found that 
systems, organizations provide other benefits as well, such as forming men benefitted more than women from SHGs’ expanded financial access 
group farm and non-farming enterprises (Agarwal, 2021), linking and livelihood interventions due to men’s greater mobility and access to 
smallholders to markets (Gramzow et al., 2018); World Bank, 2021); resources. However, similar to Goetz & Gupta (1996) and discussed in 
Wouterse & Faye, 2020), and increasing bargaining power and access to Kabeer (1998), we caution against assumptions that male control over 
government officials (Agarwal, 2018). Organizations have also been this part of the value chain in the program portends a loss of women’s 
found to have positive impacts on income, yields, production quality, power. Second, the program increased women’s working hours at the 
service delivery, women’s empowerment, the adoption of technologies, expense of rest and leisure hours, highlighting the potential “dark side” 
and the environment (Abebaw & Haile, 2013; Bizikova, et al., 2020; V. of social capital (Nichols, 2021). This aligns with other studies that 
Kumar et al., 2015; Mwambi et al., 2021; Spielman et al., 2010). found that women had increased time pressures and were in a more 
Emphasis should not only be on producer organizations, given that the vulnerable position from COVID-19 lockdowns (Agarwal, 2021, 2022; 
post-farm economy employs more than the on-farm economy in Africa, Kabeer et al., 2021; Krauss et al., 2022; Puerta Silva et al., 2020). Third, 
Asia, and Latin America (Dolislager et al., 2021). SHG members were fearful of the increased risk from COVID-19 expo-
We must mention some important caveats to the above recommen- sure due to their participation in the program. In addition to the above 
dation that policymakers should encourage value chain actors to join effects on participating actors, we found negative impacts of the pro-
organizations. We found that participating SHGs members were not gram on the agency of some value chain actors who were not connected 
from the poorest households in the villages. Policymakers must be aware to SHGs. The helplessness expressed by value chain actors who were not 
that those not in organizations tend to be the most vulnerable and are connected to SHGs was devastating – they were left with few options to 
often left behind (N. Kumar et al., 2021; Nichols, 2020; Bernard & support their families. 
Spielman, 2009). Our findings clearly showed the tradeoffs depended on 
value chain actors’ connections to SHGs. Programs targeting those not 
10
J. Mockshell and T. Nielsen Ritter                                                                                                                                                                            W   o  r l d   D  e v  e l o  p  m  e  n  t  1 75 (2024) 106486
6.4. Tradeoffs, synergies, and flexibility in the six-dimensional food complete, and holistic analysis of the impacts of the policy on value 
security framework chain actors. 
Establishing organizations and then activating them to rebuild 
Applying the six-dimensional food security framework allowed us to fractured value chains can provide a model for other governments to 
uncover tradeoffs both between and within some dimensions. These replicate in times of crisis, such as pandemics and extreme climate 
findings showed the more nuanced effects of the program – especially events, when both rural and urban value chain actors can operate only at 
gendered ones and those based on social connections. While the pro- limited capacities. However, if civil society, especially women, are ex-
gram increased food availability, access, utilization, and stability by pected to do the bidding of the government during a public health or 
linking FFV producers to consumers, we found various effects based on other crises (Nichols et al., 2020), the government should ensure that 
gender and connections to SHGs. On the one hand, the program participation is safe, worthwhile, includes the most vulnerable, and 
increased savings, income, collective action, and bargaining power builds resilience in food systems. Examining policies and programs 
among participating value chain actors thereby improving their agency through the lens of the six-dimensional food security framework is one 
and resilience. On the other hand, there were negative effects on the step towards designing and implementing policies that are more inclu-
agency of some actors not involved in the program – they were unable to sive. A multifaceted approach will help ensure that the most vulnerable 
build resilience to future shocks and felt a loss of agency – and on women are not left behind. 
SHG members’ rest and leisure time. We also uncovered some gendered 
effects of the program: Women were prevented from playing a more Funding 
active role in the middle of the value chain, namely in the transport and 
retailing of FFV, due to social norms. Thus, the program unwittingly This work was funded by the one CGIAR initiative on National Pol-
helped reinforce social norms that exclude women from particular ac- icies and Strategies for food, land, and water systems transformation. 
tivities in the value chain, which supports findings that gender norms 
are recalcitrant to change through a single program (N. Kumar et al., CRediT authorship contribution statement 
2021). 
Examining all six dimensions revealed some synergies across the Jonathan Mockshell: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Funding 
dimensions. For example, SHG members attributed their improved po- acquisition, Methodology, Project administration, Supervision, Valida-
litical ties from the program as a result of their receiving a solar-powered tion, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. 
cold storage facility for FFV at the program’s conclusion, thereby Thea Nielsen Ritter: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal anal-
contributing positively to the sustainability and availability dimensions ysis, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Supervision, Validation, Visu-
of food security. In addition, improving FFV availability allowed alization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. 
participating value chain actors’ food accessibility to increase. The 
above tradeoffs and synergies support findings in the literature con-
cerning the balance of achieving food security while building resilience Declaration of competing interest 
in food systems (Hodbod & Eakin, 2015; van Wassenaer et al., 2021). 
Increasing the knowledge base on how programs affect all six di- The authors declare that they have no known competing financial 
mensions of food security will help policymakers be more cognizant of interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence 
potential tradeoffs and synergies, allowing them to make more informed the work reported in this paper. 
decisions. Had we applied the four dimensions only (FAO, 2006), we 
would not have uncovered the varying effects discussed above. We also Data availability 
demonstrated the flexibility of the six-dimensional food security 
framework regarding the dimension of sustainability: Given our The data that has been used is confidential. 
emphasis on whether the procurement program built food system 
resilience during an unexpected shock, we emphasized resilience in food Acknowledgements 
systems within the sustainability dimension, rather than sustainable 
agricultural practices as in Clapp et al. (2022). We recommend that Special thanks to Frank Place from IFPRI for inspiring us to consider 
future researchers apply the six-dimensional food security framework a qualitative research approach for this work during our research design 
and adapt it based on their needs to shed light on how programs and phase. We are grateful for the initial funding for this work from the 
policies can have varied effects on food security. CGIAR COVID-19 Hub. The writing phase of this research was under-
taken with funding provided by the CGIAR Initiative on National Pol-
7. Conclusions icies and Strategies (NPS). We thank Braja Swain and his enumerator 
team for collecting the data in Odisha, India. We thank Collins Asante- 
This study contributed to the literature by applying Clapp et al.’s Addo and Diego Caro Alvarez for their help analyzing the data. Last, 
(2022) six-dimensional food security framework to examine the effects but not least, we are grateful to the journal’s anonymous reviewers for 
of a specific policy on all six dimensions – food availability, access, their constructive comments and suggestions that improved the manu-
utilization, and stability, agency, and sustainability (Clapp et al., 2022). script. The opinions expressed are those of the authors, and do not 
The policy in question was a FFV procurement program implemented by necessarily reflect those of the funders or institutions of affiliation. 
SHGs. Through semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions, 
we found that the policy was able to maintain FFV value chains and References 
contribute to all six dimensions of food security, albeit with mixed re-
sults on agency and sustainability. Value chain actors not connected to Abebaw, D., & Haile, M. (2013). The impact of cooperatives on agricultural technology 
SHGs felt a loss of agency and were unable to build further resilience in adoption: Empirical evidence from Ethiopia. Food Policy, 38, 82–91. https://doi.org/ 
food systems. In addition, there are some negative outcomes of the 10.1016/j.foodpol.2012.10.003 
Agarwal, B. (2010). Gender and green governance: The political economy of women’s 
program on participating individuals’ agency, such as increasing time presence within and beyond community forestry. South Asia Economic Journal, 11(2) 
pressure on women, reinforcing social norms on value chain roles by 349-354. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 
gender, and contributing to a loss of agency on health decisions. We 139156141101200211. 
Agarwal, B. (2018). Can group farms outperform individual family farms? Empirical 
showed that including the two additional dimensions of food security, insights from India. World Development, 108, 57–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 
namely agency and sustainability, allowed for a more thorough, worlddev.2018.03.010 
11
J. Mockshell and T. Nielsen Ritter                                                                                                                                                                            W   o  r l d   D  e v  e l o  p  m  e  n  t  1 75 (2024) 106486
Agarwal, B. (2019). Does group farming empower rural women? Lessons from India’s Gettleman, J., & Shultz, K. (2020, 25 March). “Modi Orders 3-Week Total Lockdown for 
experiments. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 47(4), 841–872. https://doi.org/ All 1.3 Billion Indians.” New York Times. Section A, Page 1. https://www.nytimes. 
10.1080/03066150.2019.1628020 com/2020/03/24/world/asia/india-coronavirus-lockdown.html. 
Agarwal, B. (2021). Livelihoods in COVID times: Gendered perils and new pathways in Gereffi, G., & Korzeniewicz, M. (Eds.). (1994). Commodity chains and global capitalism 
India. World Development. , Article 105312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. (No. 149). 
worlddev.2020.105312 Goetz, A. M., & Gupta, R. S. (1996). Who takes the credit? Gender, power, and control 
Agarwal, B. (2022). Imperatives of recognising the complexities: Gendered impacts and over loan use in rural credit programs in Bangladesh. World Development, 24(1), 
responses to COVID-19 in India. Economia Politica, 39, 31–53. https://doi.org/ 45–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-750X(95)00124-U 
10.1007/s40888-021-00242-8 Government of Odisha. (2020a, March 13). Notification No. 1706. Revenue and Disaster 
Alencar, L., Baldauf, C., Manhães, A. P., & Melo, F. P. L. (2023). Tradeoffs and synergies Management Department. https://srcodisha.nic.in/1706.pdf. 
between food security and forest cover in Brazilian drylands. Land Degradation & Government of Odisha. (2020b, March 28). Notification No. 2040. Revenue and Disaster 
Development, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.4848 Management Department. https://www.srcodisha.nic.in/2040.pdf. 
Baishya, M., Sarkar, A., & Argade, S. (2020). Problems concerning women’s participation Grabs, J., & Carodenuto, S. L. (2021). Traders as sustainability governance actors in 
and dropout from Self Help Groups in Koraput District of Odisha, India. International global food supply chains: A research agenda. Business Strategy and the Environment, 
Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 9(6), 3180–3186. https://doi. 30(2), 1314–1332. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2686 
org/10.20546/ijcmas.2020.906.380 Gramzow, A., Batt, P. J., Afari-Sefa, V., Petrick, M., & Roothaert, R. (2018). Linking 
Béné, C. (2020). Resilience of local food systems and links to food security – A review of smallholder vegetable producers to markets - A comparison of a vegetable producer 
some important concepts in the context of COVID-19 and other shocks. Food Security, group and a contract-farming arrangement in the Lushoto District of Tanzania. 
12, 805–822. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-020-01076-1 Journal of Rural Studies, 63, 168–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 
Béné, C., Al-Hassan, R. M., Amarasinghe, O., Fong, P., Ocran, J., Onumah, E., et al. jrurstud.2018.07.011 
(2016). Is resilience socially constructed? Empirical evidence from Fiji, Ghana, Sri Gruère, G., & Brooks, J. (2021). Viewpoint: Characterising early agricultural and food 
Lanka, and Vietnam. Global Environmental Change, 38, 153–170. https://doi.org/ policy responses to the outbreak of COVID-19. Food Policy, 100, Article 102017. 
10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.03.005 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2020.102017 
Bernard, T., & Spielman, D. J. (2009). Reaching the rural poor through rural producer Gugerty, M. K., Biscaye, P., & Anderson, C. L. (2018). Delivering development? Evidence 
organizations? A study of agricultural marketing cooperatives in Ethiopia. Food on self-help groups as development intermediaries in South Asia and Africa. 
policy, 34(1), 60–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2008.08.001 Development Policy Review, 37(1), 129–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12381 
Bizikova, L., Nkonya, E., Minah, M., Hanisch, M., Turaga, R. M. R., Ifejika Speranza, C., Halloran, A., Wood, A., & Sellberg, M. (2020). What can the COVID-19 pandemic teach 
et al. (2020). A scoping review of the contributions of farmers’ organizations to us about resilient Nordic food systems? Nordic Council of Ministers. https://doi.org/ 
smallholder agriculture. Nature Food, 1, 620–630. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016- 10.6027/nord2020-038 
020-00164-x Headey, D. & Ruel, M. (2020). The COVID-19 nutrition crisis: What to expect and how to 
Blee, K., & Taylor, V. (2002). Semi-structured interviewing in social movement research. protect. In: Swinnen, J. & McDermott, J. (Eds.), COVID-19 Global and Food Security 
In B. Klandermans, & S. Staggenborg (Eds.), Methods of Social movement research (pp. (pp. 38-41). International Food Policy Research Institute. https://doi.org/10.2499/ 
92–117). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.  p15738coll2.133762. 
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Henderson, J., Dicken, P., Hess, M., Coe, N., & Yeung, H. W. C. (2002). Global production 
Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa networks and the analysis of economic development. Review of International Political 
CDRI (Coalition for Disaster Resilience Infrastructure). (2020). Response to COVID-19: Economy, 9(3), 436–464. https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290210150842 
Odisha. Retrieved from https://www.preventionweb.net/files/72698_ HLPE (High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition) Food security and 
responsetocovid19odishaindia.pdf. nutrition: Building a global narrative towards 2030 Report by the High Level Panel 
Christian, P., Kandpal, E., Palaniswamy, N., & Rao, V. (2019). Safety nets and natural of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition of the Committee on World Food Security 
disaster mitigation: Evidence from cyclone Phailin in Odisha. Climatic Change, 153 2020 Rome Retried from:. 
(1–2), 141–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-018-02364-8 Hodbod, J., & Eakin, H. (2015). Adapting a social-ecological resilience framework for 
Clapp, J., Moseley, W. G., Burlingame, B., & Termine, P. (2022). The case for a six- food systems. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 5, 474–484. https://doi. 
dimensional food security framework. Food Policy, 106, Article 102164. https://doi. org/10.1007/s13412-015-0280-6 
org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2021.102164 IFPRI (International Food Policy Research Institute) COVID-19 policy response (CPR) 
Coleman, J. (1988). Social capital and the creation of human capital. American Journal of portal https://www.ifpri.org/project/covid-19-policy-response-cpr-portal 2022 
Sociology, 94, S95–S120 (Suppl.). Retrieved from. 
Córdoba, D., Peredo, A. M., & Chaves, P. (2021). Shaping alternatives to development: IFPRI (International Food Policy Research Institute) Food Systems https://www.ifpri. 
Solidarity and reciprocity in the Andes during COVID-19. World Development, 139, org/topic/food-systems 2022 Retrieved from. 
Article 105323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105323 Kabeer, N. (1998). Money can’t buy me love? Re-evaluating gender, credit and 
Devereux, S., Béné, C., & Hoddinott, J. (2020). Conceptualising COVID-19’s impacts on empowerment in rural Bangladesh. Institute of Development Studies. Retrieved from 
household food security. Food Security, 12, 769–772. https://doi.org/10.1007/ https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/handle/20.500.12413/13879. 
s12571-020-01085-0 Kabeer, N. (1999). Resources, agency, achievement: Reflections on the measurement of 
Dolgui, A., Dmitry, I., & Sokolov, B. (2018). Ripple effect in the supply chain: An analysis women’s empowerment. Development and Change, 30(3), 435–464. https://doi.org/ 
and recent literature. International Journal of Production Research, 56(1–2), 414–430. 10.1111/1467-7660.00125 
https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2017.1387680 Kabeer, N. (2001). Conflicts over credit: Re-evaluating the empowerment potential of 
Dolislager, M., Reardon, T., Arslan, A., Fox, L., Liverpool-Tasie, S., Sauer, C., et al. loans to women in rural Bangladesh. World development, 29(1), 63–84. https://doi. 
(2021). Youth and Adult Agrifood System Employment in Developing Regions: Rural org/10.1016/S0305-750X(00)00081-4 
(Peri-Urban to Hinterland) vs. Urban. The Journal of Development Studies, 57(4), Kabeer, N. (2017). Economic pathways to women’s empowerment and active citizenship: 
571–593. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2020.1808198 What does the evidence from Bangladesh tell us? The Journal of Development Studies, 
Eyben, R., Kabeer, N., & Cornwall, A. (2008). Conceptualising empowerment and the 53(5), 649–663. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2016.1205730 
implications for pro-poor growth: a paper for the DAC Poverty Network. Institute of Kabeer, N., Mahmud, S., & Tasneem, S. (2011). Does paid work provide a pathway to 
Development Studies. Retrieved from https://www.ids.ac.uk/download.php? women’s empowerment? Empirical findings from Bangladesh. Institute of Development 
file=files/dmfile/conceptualisingempowermentpaperforPOVNET.pdf. Studies. IDS Working Paper 375. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10361/ 
Fan, S., Teng, P., Chew, P., Smith, G., & Copeland, L. (2021). Food system resilience and 16054. 
COVID-19 – Lessons from the Asian experience. Global Food Security, 28, Article Kabeer, N., Narain, N., Arora, V., & Lal, V. (2019). Group rights and gender justice: 
100501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2021.100501 Exploring tensions within an indigenous community in India. Working paper 33. 
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). (2006). Policy Brief Issue 2–Food Security. International Inequalities Institute, London School of Economics and Political 
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rome, Italy. http://www. Science, London, UK. Retrieved from http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/101873/. 
fao.org/forestry/13128-0e6f36f27e0091055bec28ebe830f46b3.pdf. Kabeer, N., Razavi, S., & Rodgers, Y. (2021). Feminist Economic Perspectives on the 
FAO Global initiative on food loss and waste reduction. (2015). Retrieved from: COVID-19 Pandemic. Feminist Economics, 27(1–2), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 
https://www.fao.org/3/i4068e/i4068e.pdf. 13545701.2021.1876906 
Fernandez, A.P. (2006). History and spread of self-help affinity group movement in India. Krauss, J. E., Artur, L., Brockington, D., Castro, E., Jr, Fernando, J., Jr, Fisher, J., et al. 
IFAD. Discussion Paper. https://myrada.org/wp-content/uploads/pdf/history3_sag_ (2022). ‘To prevent this disease, we have to stay at home, but if we stay at home, we 
ifad.pdf. die of hunger’–Livelihoods, vulnerability and coping with Covid-19 in rural 
Folke, C., Carpenter, S. R., Walker, B., Scheffer, M., Chapin, T., & Rockström, J. (2010). Mozambique. World Development, 151, Article 105757. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 
Resilience thinking: Integrating resilience, adaptability and transformability. Ecology worlddev.2021.105757 
and Society, 15(4). Kumar, N., Scott, S., Menon, P., Kannan, S., Cunningham, K., Tyagi, P., et al. (2018). 
Frank, S. M., Webster, J., McKenzie, B., Geldsetzer, P., Manne-Goehler, J., Andall- Pathways from women’s group-based programs to nutrition change in South Asia: A 
Brereton, G., et al. (2019). Consumption of fruits and vegetables among individuals conceptual framework and literature review. Global Food Security, 17, 172–185. 
15 years and older in 28 low-and middle-income countries. The Journal of Nutrition, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2017.11.002 
149(7), 1252–1259. https://doi.org/10.1093/jn/nxz040 Kumar, N., Raghunathan, K., Arrieta, A., Jilani, A., Chakrabarti, S., Menon, P., et al. 
Garikipati, S. (2008). The impact of lending to women on household vulnerability and (2019). Social networks, mobility, and political participation: The potential for 
women’s empowerment: Evidence from India. World Development, 36(12), women’s self-help groups to improve access and use of public entitlement schemes in 
2620–2642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2007.11.008 India. World Development, 114, 28–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 
worlddev.2018.09.023 
12
J. Mockshell and T. Nielsen Ritter                                                                                                                                                                            W   o  r l d   D  e v  e l o  p  m  e  n  t  1 75 (2024) 106486
Kumar, N., Raghunathan, K., Arrieta, A., Jilani, A., & Pandey, S. (2021). The power of the six countries in Africa and Asia. Food Policy, 100(April). https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 
collective empowers women: Evidence from self-help groups in India. World foodpol.2020.102001 
Development, 146, Article 105579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Raghunathan, K., Kumar, N., Gupta, S., Thai, G., Scott, S., Choudhury, A., et al. (2022). 
worlddev.2021.105579 Scale and sustainability: The impact of a women’s self-help group program on 
Kumar, V., Wankhede, K. G., & Gena, H. C. (2015). Role of Cooperatives in Improving household economic well-being in India. The Journal of Development Studies, 59(4), 
Livelihood of Farmers on Sustainable Basis. American Journal of Educational Research, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2022.2154151 
3(10), 1258–1266. Reardon, T., Mishra, A., Nuthalapati, C. S. R., Bellemare, M. F., & Zilberman, D. (2020). 
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). An application of hierarchical kappa-type statistics in COVID-19’s Disruption of India’s Transformed Food Supply Chains. Economic & 
the assessment of majority agreement among multiple observers. Biometrics, 33(2), Political Weekly, 55(18), 18–22. 
363–374. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529786 Roe, E. (1994). Narrative policy analysis: Theory and practice. Durham, NC: Duke 
Lipinski, B., Hanson, C., Lomax, J., Kitinoja, L., Waite, R., & Searchinger, T. (2013). University Press.  
Reducing food loss and waste. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute. Retrieved Rotz, S., & Fraser, E. D. G. (2015). Resilience and the industrial food system: Analyzing 
from https://files.wri.org/d8/s3fs-public/reducing_food_loss_and_waste.pdf. the impacts of agricultural industrialization on food system vulnerability. Journal of 
Mahajan, K., & Tomar, S. (2020). COVID-19 and Supply Chain Disruption: Evidence from Environmental Studies and Sciences, 5, 459–473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412- 
Food Markets in India. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 103(1), 35–52. 015-0277-1 
https://doi.org/10.1111/ajae.12158 Roy, D., Boss, R., & Pradhan, M. (2020). How India’s food-based safety net is responding 
Maps of India. (2022). Map of Odisha. Retrieved from https://www.mapsofindia.com/ to the COVID-19 lockdown”. In: J. Swinnen. & J. McDermott (Eds.), COVID-19 Global 
maps/orissa/. and Food Security (pp. 106-110). International Food Policy Research Institute. 
Meyfroidt, P. (2018). Trade-offs between environment and livelihoods: Bridging the https://doi.org/10.2499/p15738coll2.133762. 
global land use and food security discussions. Global Food Security, 16(March), 9–16. Sedai, A. K., Vasudevan, R., & Pena, A. A. (2021). Friends and benefits? Endogenous 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2017.08.001 rotating savings and credit associations as alternative for women’s empowerment in 
Ministry of Home Affairs. (2020a). Annexure to Ministry of Home Affairs Order No. 40- India. World Development, 145, Article 105515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 
3/2020-D. 24 March 2020. Retrieved from https://www.mha.gov.in/sites/default/ worlddev.2021.105515 
files/Guidelines.pdf. Senapati, A. K., & Ojha, K. (2019). Socio-economic empowerment of women through 
Ministry of Home Affairs. (2020b). Order. No. 40-3/2020-DM-I(A). 27 March 2020. micro-entrepreneurship: Evidence from Odisha, India. International Journal of Rural 
https://www.mha.gov.in/notifications/circulars-covid-19. Management, 15(2), 159–184. https://doi.org/10.1177/0973005219866588 
Mockshell, J., & Birner, R. (2020). Who has the better story? On the narrative Spielman, D. J., Byerlee, D., Alemu, D., & Kelemework, D. (2010). Policies to promote 
foundations of agricultural development dichotomies. World Development, 135, cereal intensification in Ethiopia: The search for appropriate public and private 
Article 105043. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105043 roles. Food Policy, 35, 185–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2009.12.002 
MOFPI (Ministry of Food Processing Industries). (2022). Annual Report 2021-22. Swain, R. B., & Wallentin, F. Y. (2012). Factors empowering women in Indian self-help 
Government of India. https://www.mofpi.gov.in/sites/default/files/mofpi_annual_ group programs. International Review of Applied Economics, 26(4), 425–444. https:// 
report_for_web_english.pdf. doi.org/10.1080/02692171.2011.595398 
Mogues, T. (2020, June 29). Food markets during COVID-19. International Monetary Fund Szreter, S., & Woolcock, M. (2004). Health by association? Social capital, social theory, 
Fiscal Affairs. https://www.imf.org/-/media/Files/Publications/covid19-special- and the political economy of public health. International Journal of Epidemiology, 33 
notes/en-special-series-on-covid-19-food-markets-during-covid-19.ashx. (4), 650–667. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyh013 
Mohanty, J. (2015). Performance analysis of ‘Mission Shakti’ in empowering women in Tendall, D. M., Joerin, J., Kopainsky, B., Edwards, P., Shreck, A., Le, Q. B., et al. (2015). 
Odisha – An empirical study. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Food system resilience: Defining the concept. Global Food Security, 6, 17–23. https:// 
Invention, 4(8), 77–85. https://www.ijhssi.org/papers/v4(8)/K0481077085.pdf. doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2015.08.001 
Mohapatra, S., & Sahoo, B. K. (2016). Determinants of participation in self-help-groups Van Hoyweghen, K. V., Fabry, A., Feyaerts, H., Wade, I., & Maertens, M. (2021). 
(SHG) and its impact on women empowerment. Indian Growth and Development Resilience of global and local value chains to the Covid pandemic: Survey evidence 
Review, 9(1), 53–78. https://doi.org/10.1108/IGDR-04-2015-0016 from vegetable value chains in Senegal. Agricultural Economics, 52(3), 423–440. 
Mwambi, M., Bijman, J., & Galie, A. (2021). The effect of membership in producer https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12627 
organizations on women’s empowerment: Evidence from Kenya. Women’s Studies Vásquez, V. M., & Andersen, R. (2023). Community seed banks: Instruments for food 
International. Forum, 87(July–August), Article 102492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. security or unsustainable endeavour? A case study of Mkombezi Community Seed 
wsif.2021.102492 Bank in Malawi. Food Security, 15, 1087–1108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571- 
Nichols, C. (2020). Nutrition sensitive agriculture: An equity-based analysis from India. 023-01374-4 
World Development, 133, Article 105004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. WFP (World Food Programme). (2020). COVID-19: Potential impact on the world’s 
worlddev.2020.105004 poorest people. April. Retried from https://www.wfp.org/publications/covid-19- 
Nichols, C. (2021). Self-help groups as platforms for development: The role of social potential-impact-worlds-poorest-people. 
capital. World Development, 146, Article 105575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. WHO (World Health Organization) (2020). WHO Director-General’s opening remarks at 
worlddev.2021.105575 the media briefing on COVID-19 – 11 March 2020. Retrieved from https://www. 
Nichols, C., Jalali, F., Ali, S., Gupta, D., Shrestha, S., & Fischer, H. (2020). The gendered who.int/director-general/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks- 
impacts of COVID-19 amid Agrarian distress: Opportunities for comprehensive at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19—11-march-2020. 
policy response in Agrarian South Asia. Politics & Gender, 16(4), 1142–1149. https:// Willett, W., Rockström, J., Loken, B., Springmann, M., Lang, T., Vermeulen, S., et al. 
doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X20000483 (2019). Food in the Anthropocene: The EAT–Lancet Commission on healthy diets 
Ostrom, E., & Ahn, T. K. (2007). The Meaning of Social Capital and Its Link to Collective from sustainable food systems. The Lancet commissions, 393(10170), 447–492. 
Action. In G. T. Svendsen, & G. L. H. Svendsen (Eds.), Handbook of Social Capital: The https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31788-4 
Troika of Sociology, Political Science and Economics (pp. 17–35). Edward Elgar World Bank. (2021). Realizing Scale in Smallholder-Based Agriculture: Policy Options for the 
Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781848447486.00008.  Philippines. World Bank, Washington, DC. Retrieved from https://openknowledge. 
Pandey, V., Nagarajan, H. K., & Kumar, D. (2021). Impact of Gendered Participation in worldbank.org/handle/10986/35982. 
market-linked value-chains on Economic Outcomes: Evidence from India. Food Wouterse, F., & Faye, A. (2020). Institutions of Collective Action and Smallholder 
Policy, 104, Article 102142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2021.102142 Performance: Evidence from Senegal. In: D. Resnick, X. Diao, & G. Tadesse (Eds.) 
Park, J., Kim, C., & Son, S. (2022). Disparities in food insecurity during the COVID-19 2020. Sustaining Africa’s Agrifood System Transformation: The Role of Public Policies 
pandemic: A two-year analysis. Cities, 131, Article 104003. https://doi.org/ (pp. 87-101). International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and 
10.1016/j.cities.2022.104003 AKADEMIYA2063. https://doi.org/10.2499/9780896293946. 
Patel, S. K., Mathew, B., Nanda, A., Mohanty, B., & Saggurti, N. (2020). Voices of rural van Wassenaer, L., Oosterkamp, E., van Asseldonk, M., & Ryan, M. (2021). Food system 
people: Community-level assessment of effects and resilience to natural disasters in resilience: Ontology development and impossible trinities. Agriculture & Food 
Odisha, India. International Journal of Population Studies, 6(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/ Security, 10, 38. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-021-00332-7 
10.18063/ijps.v6i1.1042 Yi, J., Meemken, E. M., Mazariegos-Anastassiou, V., Liu, J., Kim, E., Gómez, M. I., et al. 
Puerta Silva, C., Torres Muriel, E., Amaya Epiayú, R. C., Dorado González, A., Epieyú, F., (2021). Post-farmgate food value chains make up most of consumer food 
Frías Epinayú, E., et al. (2020). If the coronavirus doesn’t kill us, hunger will. expenditures globally. Nature Food, 2(6), 417–425. https://doi.org/10.1038/ 
Regional absenteeism and the Wayuu permanent humanitarian crises. Regions and s43016-021-00279-9 
Cohesion, 10(3), 140–155. https://doi.org/10.3167/reco.2020.100312 Zollet, S., Colombo, L., De Meo, P., Marino, D., McGreevy, S. R., McKeon, N., et al. 
Quisumbing, A., Sproule, K., Martinez, E., & Malapit, H. (2021). Do tradeoffs among (2021). Towards Territorially Embedded, Equitable and Resilient Food Systems? 
dimensions of women’s empowerment and nutrition outcomes exist? Evidence from Insights from Grassroots Responses to COVID-19 in Italy and the City Region of 
Rome. Sustainability, 13(5), 2425. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052425 
13