Building back normal? An investigation of practice changes in the charitable and on-the-go food provision sectors through COVID-19

IF 3.6 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Steffen Hirth, Filippo Oncini, F. Boons, Bob Doherty
{"title":"Building back normal? An investigation of practice changes in the charitable and on-the-go food provision sectors through COVID-19","authors":"Steffen Hirth, Filippo Oncini, F. Boons, Bob Doherty","doi":"10.1080/15487733.2022.2076352","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic has brought about debates on rethinking food and other socio-technical systems. While swiftly re-establishing normality has understandable appeal in a crisis, the landscape-level changes during the pandemic also hold windows of opportunity to “build back better” and to achieve sustainability transitions. In this article, we ask whether a cycle of disruption and adaptation results either in the rise of more sustainable niche practices or the consolidation of the socio-technical regimes in place. To approach this question, we consider the specific cases of charitable and on-the-go food provision and examine the extent to which COVID-induced adaptations have resulted in debates about, and implementations of, more just and sustainable practices. We draw on systems transitions and practice theoretical approaches to elucidate dynamics and elasticity and thus the effect of socio-technical practice changes. After describing the pre-COVID food regimes, we evaluate organizational practice adaptations during the lockdowns with regard to (1) changing cultural images of food security and provision, (2) socio-technical innovations, and (3) new forms of governance. We find that rather than justifying the public and policy frame of “building back better,” the effect of recovery measures reinforces the socio-technical regimes and omits wider sectoral and societal sustainability challenges such as the systemic reduction of poverty and waste.","PeriodicalId":35192,"journal":{"name":"Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2022.2076352","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic has brought about debates on rethinking food and other socio-technical systems. While swiftly re-establishing normality has understandable appeal in a crisis, the landscape-level changes during the pandemic also hold windows of opportunity to “build back better” and to achieve sustainability transitions. In this article, we ask whether a cycle of disruption and adaptation results either in the rise of more sustainable niche practices or the consolidation of the socio-technical regimes in place. To approach this question, we consider the specific cases of charitable and on-the-go food provision and examine the extent to which COVID-induced adaptations have resulted in debates about, and implementations of, more just and sustainable practices. We draw on systems transitions and practice theoretical approaches to elucidate dynamics and elasticity and thus the effect of socio-technical practice changes. After describing the pre-COVID food regimes, we evaluate organizational practice adaptations during the lockdowns with regard to (1) changing cultural images of food security and provision, (2) socio-technical innovations, and (3) new forms of governance. We find that rather than justifying the public and policy frame of “building back better,” the effect of recovery measures reinforces the socio-technical regimes and omits wider sectoral and societal sustainability challenges such as the systemic reduction of poverty and waste.
恢复正常?对2019冠状病毒病期间慈善和流动食品供应行业实践变化的调查
2019冠状病毒病大流行引发了关于重新思考粮食和其他社会技术系统的辩论。虽然在危机中迅速恢复正常具有可以理解的吸引力,但大流行期间的景观级变化也为“更好地重建”和实现可持续性过渡提供了机会。在这篇文章中,我们提出了这样一个问题:破坏和适应的循环是否会导致更可持续的生态位实践的兴起,或者巩固现有的社会技术制度。为了解决这个问题,我们考虑了慈善和流动食品供应的具体案例,并研究了covid - 19引发的适应在多大程度上导致了关于更公正和可持续做法的辩论和实施。我们利用系统过渡和实践理论方法来阐明动态和弹性,从而影响社会技术实践的变化。在描述了疫情前的粮食制度之后,我们从以下方面评估了封锁期间的组织实践适应情况:(1)粮食安全和供应文化形象的变化,(2)社会技术创新,以及(3)新的治理形式。我们发现,恢复措施的效果并没有证明“重建得更好”的公共和政策框架是合理的,而是强化了社会技术制度,并忽略了更广泛的部门和社会可持续性挑战,如系统性地减少贫困和浪费。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy
Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy Social Sciences-Geography, Planning and Development
CiteScore
12.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
54
审稿时长
27 weeks
期刊介绍: Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy is a refereed, open-access journal which recognizes that climate change and other socio-environmental challenges require significant transformation of existing systems of consumption and production. Complex and diverse arrays of societal factors and institutions will in coming decades need to reconfigure agro-food systems, implement renewable energy sources, and reinvent housing, modes of mobility, and lifestyles for the current century and beyond. These innovations will need to be formulated in ways that enhance global equity, reduce unequal access to resources, and enable all people on the planet to lead flourishing lives within biophysical constraints. The journal seeks to advance scientific and political perspectives and to cultivate transdisciplinary discussions involving researchers, policy makers, civic entrepreneurs, and others. The ultimate objective is to encourage the design and deployment of both local experiments and system innovations that contribute to a more sustainable future by empowering individuals and organizations and facilitating processes of social learning.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信