Stockholm Resilience Centre

Master’s programme 2019/21, 120 ECTS
Food for transformation - food for thought
The development of transformative capacity of niche initiatives
in the Greater Cape Town area and the Stockholm city-region
Märta Jacobson
Contents
1. Introduction ....................................................................................................... 6
2. Background ....................................................................................................... 8
2.2 Stockholm – Sweden ...................................................................................................... 10
3. Theoretical framework .................................................................................... 13
3.1 Food systems .................................................................................................................. 13
3.3 Scaling and amplification processes .............................................................................. 17
4. Methods ........................................................................................................... 19
4.2 Data collection................................................................................................................ 20
4.3 Data analysis .................................................................................................................. 22
5.1 Seeds with similar visions of local food systems ........................................................... 25
5.2 Developing transformative capacity in the niche ........................................................... 28
5.2.1 Biosphere – reconnecting to life-support systems ................................................... 28
5.2.2 Social cohesion and community engagement .......................................................... 30
5.2.3 Agency and innovation ............................................................................................ 31
5.3 Amplifying impact to contribute to sustainability ......................................................... 33
5.3.1 Stabilizing ................................................................................................................ 33
2
5.4.2 Enablers for building capacity and amplifying impacts .......................................... 37
6. Discussion ....................................................................................................... 39
6.1 Building momentum through collaboration within the niche ........................................ 39
6.2 Scaling deep – efforts towards a more equitable food system? ..................................... 40
6.3 Rethinking transformation.............................................................................................. 42
Appendix 3: Amplification processes and examples ........................................................... 57
Appendix 4: Ethical Review – final review ......................................................................... 61
3
Acknowledgement
First and foremost, I would like to thank all the participants in my study. Without you there
would be no study, and there will not be a transformed food system. Thanks youyou’re your
time and interesting dialogues. Your work is inspiring to many and brings hope for the future.
Many thanks to my supervisor, Laura Pereira, for all the support, guidance, and pep talks, and
for always being there when needed. My co-supervisors, My Sellberg and Amanda Wood, for
the invaluable feedback throughout the process. It has been great working with you all and I
have learnt a lot from you.
I also want to thank all brilliant members in my thesis groups: Stephan, Jenny, Hanna, Linna,
and Chris, who have given constructive input and inspiration all the time throughout this
process, and to the whole SERSD-class of 2019-2021.
To Tove Björklund and Elke Markey who assisted me with their contacts. Thank you!
Thank you, Teresa, for proofreading my thesis. I am so grateful for your help.
Finally, my family and friends who are always there for me, and Joseph for all the
motivation, advice, and encouragement.
4
Abstract
As the global food system causes environmental degradation and contributes to detrimental
health effects, a transformation is vital for a sustainable and fair future for all. Research on
food system transformation and the role of food initiatives have increased. Niche initiatives
or “seeds” in the food sectors in Stockholm and Cape Town are finding new ways to
contribute to change in the social-ecological systems in which they operate. The questions
addressed in this thesis are (i) how the transformative capacity of these seeds have developed
over time (ii) what amplification strategies the seeds apply to increase their impact and (iii)
what the enablers and barriers to amplification processes are. A three-dimensional framework
of transformative capacity and a typology of eight amplification processes are used for the
analysis. Findings indicate that seeds are building momentum and developing transformative
capacity within three areas: connecting to the biosphere, social cohesion, and agency. The
initiatives foremost apply strategies of stabilizing, growing, scaling deep, and scaling up to
amplify their transformative impact. Food seeds play an important role in building
sustainable food systems and their contribution to change challenges the traditional thinking
of growth in transformations and emphasize aspects of changing values, improving quality,
and encouraging diversity.
List of figures and tables
Figure 1: Map of district boundaries in South Africa with the City of Cape Town .................. 8
Figure 2: Map of the Stockholm city-region............................................................................ 10
Figure 5: Typology of amplification processes ....................................................................... 18
Figure 6: Summary of the research process. ............................................................................ 20
Figure 7: Tree diagram showing the sampling process in Stockholm and Cape Town. .......... 21
Figure 8: Description of the data analysis process................................................................... 23
Figure 9: Frequency of amplifying processes applied by seeds. ............................................. 33
Table 1: Attributes and descriptions of the seeds in Cape Town and Stockholm.................... 26
Table 2: Summary of findings from Björklund (2016) and Markey (2017) ............................ 28
Table 3: Reconnecting to the biosphere - examples and evidence .......................................... 29
Table 4: Social cohesion and community engagement - examples and evidence ................... 31
Table 5: Agency and innovation - examples and evidence...................................................... 32
Table 6: Descriptions and examples of barriers to apply amplification processes .................. 37
Table 7: Descriptions and examples of enablers to amplify impact ........................................ 38
6
1. Introduction
Transforming food systems is key for a sustainable and fair future for all. Adequate food is a
human right which is realized when “every man, woman and child, alone or in community with
others, has physical and economic access at all times to adequate food or means for its
procurement” (Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 1999). Access to safe,
nutritious, and sufficient food is also one of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
However, 690 million people in the world are hungry while overweight and obesity increase in
all parts of the world (FAO et al. 2020). Concurrently, global food production is causing
environmental degradation, pushing Earth’s systems beyond a safe operating space. Food
systems account for 34% of total GHG emissions (Crippa et al. 2021) and is the main driver of
biodiversity loss (Rockström et al. 2020). Thus, a transformation of the global food system,
embracing economic and social change, and technological innovation, is urgently needed to
address environmental challenges and increasing inequities (Pereira et al. 2019, Willett et al.
2019, Vieira et al. 2019).
There has been progress in addressing the three main challenges of food systems: food security
and nutrition, livelihoods, and environmental sustainability, but a lot remains to be done to
meet the SDGs (OECD 2021). These challenges are visible in diverse urban regions such as
Greater Cape Town in South Africa and Stockholm city-region in Sweden. While food
insecurity linked to poverty and inequality is prevailing in the former (Pereira 2014, Siebert
2020), the latter is struggling with a high per capita use of resources and barriers to reach
environmental goals (Sellberg et al. 2020). However, there are initiatives working to tackle
these challenges and contribute to sustainable food systems. Transformation research describe
these initiatives as seeds, defined as initiatives applying a social, technological, economic, or
social-ecological way of thinking or doing that is currently not dominant (Bennett et al. 2016,
Pereira et al. 2018). Many seeds in Stockholm aim to contribute towards a transformation of
food systems, and the region could be a forerunner in contributing to this (Sellberg et al. 2020).
In Cape Town, seeds supporting local food systems have developed to also promote a local
social economy (Zgambo et al. 2018).
There has been a call for understanding more about the transformative potential of emergent
sustainability initiatives and their potential role in contributing to change (Pereira et al. 2018,
Weber et al. 2020, Dorninger et al. 2020). Several studies have investigated transformative
potential of small-scale sustainability initiatives, but few are looking at a temporal scale and to
7
my knowledge, none are examining cases from both Global South and Global North within the
same study. Björklund (2016) and Markey (2017) studied food seeds in Stockholm and Cape
Town respectively. Björklund (2016) focused on the potential of eco-gastronomy in the
Stockholm region to contribute to transformative change while Markey (2017) analysed the
transformative potential of the eco-gastronomic niche in Cape Town. This thesis is an attempt
to follow up and explore how these seeds have developed over time.
1.1 Purpose and research questions
The purpose of this research is to enhance the understanding of how seeds in Cape Town and
Stockholm can contribute to a transformation of the food system to become (more) sustainable,
resilient and equitable. Therefore, this thesis aims to address the following research questions:
• What can a temporal analysis tell us about the transformative potential of seeds in Cape
Town and Stockholm? (RQ1)
• What amplifying processes have been undertaken in order to increase the impact of
these seeds? (RQ2)
• What are the drivers and barriers influencing an effective implementation of those
amplifying strategies? (RQ3)
By using cases from South Africa and Sweden, my aim is to analyse seeds from the global
South and the global North within one study. The intention is to focus on a temporal aspect as
well as a deeper analysis of the application of amplifying processes in the two geographical
locations by using existing frameworks. While geographical context needs to be reflected upon
in sustainability transformation research (Raven et al. 2017), this study strives to see the
common features of seeds from two different contexts. The focus is on food seeds as
phenomenon because they think and act in new ways to govern and live in harmony with the
Earth’s ecosystems. As the biosphere is increasingly operated by humans (Folke et al. 2011),
these seeds and their potential to contribute to change, are essential to study.
8
2. Background
This chapter gives a background to the food systems in Cape Town and Stockholm. Though
different at the local scale, both systems are embedded in the global food system, entailing both
challenges and opportunities.
2.1 Cape Town – South Africa
Cape Town is the second largest city in South Africa and the capital of the Western Cape
(Figure 1). The region has 6.3 million inhabitants and the population of Cape Town is
approximately 4 million (Statistics South Africa 2016). Food insecurity is a large problem,
especially prevalent amongst black African and coloured households1 (Shisana et al. 2014),
and in Cape Town 80% of the households are food insecure with a low level of dietary diversity
(Haysom et al. 2017). Price is the main factor in the purchasing of food and the income of
households is therefore key to food security as it affects the ability of households to financially
access food. Moreover, a lack of nutrition knowledge is also a critical factor (Battersby et al.
2014, Shisana et al. 2014, Faber and Drimie 2016).
Figure 1: Map of district boundaries in South Africa (after elections 2016) with the City of
Cape Town highlighted in red within the Western Cape in yellow. (Source: Wikimedia
commons)
1 The apartheid-era racial categories are still used by the state in South Africa: Black African, Coloured, Indian/Asian and
White (Statistics South Africa 2016, Tewolde 2021).
9
The South African food system is unsustainable with increasing negative impacts on social and
environmental welfare reinforcing each other (Pereira and Drimie 2016, Drimie et al. 2018). It
is transitioning into a regime where four major companies dominate the whole food chain
(Haysom et al. 2017, Metelerkamp et al. 2020). In Cape Town, supermarkets have expanded
rapidly, accounting for 97% of formal food retail (Battersby 2017). Despite the increasing
numbers of supermarkets in lower-income areas, the distribution is still unequal and
supermarkets are driving a change towards unhealthier diets as the supply of highly processed
food increases. Even though healthier products are also becoming more available, they are
more expensive than the unhealthy food (Greenberg 2017). Another effect of the supermarket
expansion is the competition to local businesses, resulting in small producers becoming
marginalised (Battersby 2017).
The food system in Cape Town has a clear legacy of apartheid with an unequal distribution of
resources and power creating marginalised areas in which access to food is constrained
(Battersby et al. 2014, Siebert 2020). The system is complex and dual, comprising the formal
sector and the informal sector. The latter has grown as a response to apartheid and the
inequalities that system brought in terms of access to resources needed to produce or buy food
(Battersby et al. 2014, Haysom et al. 2017). This unequal access to food manifests itself in a
low consumption of fruits and vegetables in the poor and informal settlements (Shisana et al.
2014, Siebert 2020). Despite improvements in the situation in the last ten years, food insecurity
is still an urgent issue and the local food system is under pressure with increasing climate
volatility and liberalized markets (Haysom et al. 2017).
Concurrently there is a growing awareness regarding the need for a transformation of the food
system to become more fair and sustainable (Metelerkamp et al. 2020). Among the less affluent
in urban areas, alternative food networks play an important role to make food available and
accessible (Siebert 2020) and there are civil society organisations working to promote the use
of indigenous foods (Pereira et al. 2019). Metelerkamp et al. (2020) identify an emerging niche
in the South African food system where a grassroots movement with a shared vision of
transforming the current system is challenging the dominant structures through their work on
agroecological production, food sovereignty and localization.
Through studying the eco-gastronomic niche in Cape Town, Markey (2017) found that
initiatives can be considered as seeds of transformation since they work towards social-
ecological sustainability, creating awareness and stimulating change. Seeds create new
10
relationships between humans and nature through their business models, and there is an
interaction between actors within the niches. The initiatives focus mainly on scaling deep and
scaling out, and by sharing of ideas, experimentation and creativity, they create new
constellations of existing system components.
2.2 Stockholm – Sweden
Stockholm is the capital of Sweden (see Figure 2) with a population of approximately 976 000
people in the city and 2.4 million people within the county (Statistiska Centralbyrån 2021).
While food security is not commonly discussed in a Swedish context, there are increasing
inequalities in health outcomes related to food as households with low socio-economic status
and low incomes access less healthy and nutritious food (Mattisson 2016,
Folkhälsomyndigheten och Livsmedelsverket 2017). The intake of unhealthy food is high
(Wood et al 2019) but there is also an upward trend in the sales of vegetables which is driven
by health aspects, increased interest in food and sustainability, and urbanization (Fernqvist and
Göransson 2021).
Figure 2: Map of the Stockholm city-region from Sellberg et al. (2020). The definition of the
Stockholm-city region is based on Eastern Sweden (NUTS1) in the European regional division
and is used by local food governance actors. It includes six counties including Stockholm
county.
11
While the Swedish food system has an impact on health it also influences environmental
processes nationally and internationally (Cederberg 2018, Steinbach et al. 2018). Food
production contributes to negative environmental impacts and Swedish diets transgress several
environmental boundaries including emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) and cropland use
(Moberg et al. 2020). 16% of the GHG-emissions in Sweden are related to food consumption
(Naturvårdsverket 2020). However, Martin and Brandão (2017) show that environmental
impacts could be reduced through increasing Swedish food production.
Like in South Africa, there are a few large, national supermarkets that dominate the food retail
sector in Sweden as four supermarket chains covers 94% of the market share (Antonissen 2020,
Fernqvist and Göransson 2021). A trend is that different sectors of the food system, such as
processing and retailing, extract as much economic value as possible from both the producers
and consumers while negative externalities on the environment and undesirable effects on
human health continues to increase (Marsden 2018).
The Nordic countries are in a good position to reach healthy and sustainable food systems with
financial, educational and institutional prerequisites in place (Wood et al. 2019). In addition,
sustainability is accentuated in the national and regional food strategies (Government Offices
of Sweden 2017, Länsstyrelsen Stockholm et al. 2019). The food strategy of the Stockholm
County aims to promote the regional production of food and emphasizes the important role
played by restaurants in increasing a sustainable food consumption, recognizing that there are
consumers with knowledge and money who are interested in buying from local producers
(Martin and Brandão 2017, Länsstyrelsen Stockholm et al. 2019). This demand co-develops
with an emerging group of local food-producers who concentrate on niche markets and focus
on selling directly to customers (Kuylenstierna et al. 2019), a counter-trend to the tendency of
an increasing distance between consumers and producers (Eden et al. 2008, Milestad et al.
2010). With this growing interest in sustainable and healthy food, a beneficial national
regulatory system on environment and animal welfare, and several innovative initiatives,
Stockholm region has a good opportunity to be a precursor in transforming the food system
into a more sustainable one (Sellberg et al. 2020).
By studying food seeds in the Stockholm region, Björklund (2016) shows how niche initiatives
provide solutions to challenges in the food system and create new pathways through
innovations and networking. They establish strengthened environmental values and increase
awareness about sustainability in the food sector. Björklund concludes that eco-gastronomic
12
initiatives can be seeds for transformation through processes of scaling out, and possibly
scaling up.
Despite different contexts in terms of economy, politics, and social structures, there are similar
trends and developments in food systems in South Africa and Sweden. Interesting initiatives
and movements are found in both places that potentially can contribute to food system
transformation.
13
3. Theoretical framework
This chapter lays out the theoretical foundation for the thesis. It begins with a review of food
systems theory and continues with a section on social-ecological transformations including the
framework of Seeds of Good Anthropocenes (SOGA-framework) before defining
transformative capacity. Lastly, scaling and amplification processes are discussed.
3.1 Food systems
environmental, social, political, and economic factors influencing availability, access and
utilization of food (Ericksen 2008). They include the environment, people, processes and
institutions as well as all activities ranging from production to consumption (FAO 2018, Wood
et al. 2019). The food system perspective stresses the importance of linkages and feedback
loops between production and consumption, and between human and environmental health.
Eakin et al. (2017 p. 759) define s sustainable food system as a system that “achieves and
maintains food security under uncertain and dynamic social-ecological conditions, through
respecting and supporting…the integrity of the social-ecological processes necessary for food
provisioning”.
Food system transformation is complex and includes changing values, regulations, markets,
and policies as well as technologies, infrastructure, and skills. A transformation is ecological,
social and economic, but also political. Powerful actors benefitting from the current system are
often interested in maintaining the same structure while innovators, entrepreneurs and
community-based organisations are interested in changing the system (Herrero et al. 2020).
Enabling transformation on a global scale requires a systems approach to healthy and
sustainable diets, encompassing actions at different levels in the food system (Vermeulen et al.
2019). Feeding 10 billion people a healthy diet while staying within the planetary boundaries
is possible if there is a shift in diets along with an increase in productivity based on regenerative
practices and a reduction of food waste (Willett et al. 2019). The notion that diets have been
fluctuating across cultures and countries for centuries gives hope that changing diets for the
betterment of the environment and human health is possible (Vermeulen et al. 2019).
14
3.2 Social-ecological transformations and transformative capacity
Resilience thinking and SES embrace the interconnectedness of humans and nature (Folke et
al. 2010, Darnhofer et al. 2010), and transformation of these systems aims to increase societal
wellbeing and strengthen the life supporting systems of the Earth (Westley et al. 2011).
Transformational change comprises several dimensions including worldviews, norms and
beliefs; the structure of networks and interactions between actors; and rules and practices, as
well as power and resources (Folke et al. 2010, Moore et al. 2014). Transformation is explained
differently in terms of what should be transformed, for whom, and by whom (Scoones et al.
2020). Encompassing a notion of action and agency, transformation herein is defined as
processes creating “new systems and pathways while simultaneously challenging or breaking
down aspects of the existing system” (Moore et al. 2018) resulting in “fundamentally altered
human and environmental interactions and feedbacks” (Olsson et al. 2014). In a societal
system, this would alter the way societal needs are fulfilled (de Haan and Rotmans 2011).
Pereira et al. (2018) combine theory on SES transformations (Olsson et al. 2006, Moore et al.
2014) and socio-technical transitions (Geels 2002) to study how transformations occur, using
the beforementioned concept of seeds in the SOGA-framework (Figure 3). The process of
transformation is divided into three interrelated phases; preparation, navigation, and
consolidation (Olsson et al. 2004, 2014, Folke et al. 2009) where preparation can be separated
into three subprocesses (Moore et al. 2014, Pereira et al. 2018). In the first subprocess, sense-
making, the awareness of the challenges with the current system is growing while the second,
envisioning, is characterised by finding different pathways leading away from the
unsustainable system configurations. In the third process, gathering momentum, actors begin
to organize, develop networks, and mobilise support and resources.
15
Figure 3:The Seeds of Good Anthropocenes framework (Pereira et al. 2018 p. 330)
Seeds experiment, innovate and build coalitions in the niche during the preparation-phase. A
niche is a “societal subsystem understood as a constellation of culture, practices and structure
that deviates from the regime” (Van den Bosch and Rotmans 2008 p. 31) where the regime
encompasses the dominant culture, practices and interests. Learning processes, building
support and social networking are facilitated (Geels 2004, Naber et al. 2017) and through a
cumulation process seeds could gradually impact the regime if proto-regimes emerge and
become institutionalized at the meso-level through a window of opportunity (Westley et al.
2011, Pereira et al. 2018). Although seeds rarely transform a regime on their own and need to
be supported by external forces, niches can increase their potential influence on regimes by
learning from each other and thereby making the niche level more articulated and stable (Naber
et al. 2017).
The notion of transformative capacity to drive systemic change towards sustainability has been
widely addressed in the literature (Olsson et al. 2010, Wolfram 2016, Brodnik and Brown 2018)
and can be defined as “the capacity of individuals and organisations to be able to both transform
themselves and their society in a deliberate, conscious way. This includes the capacity to
imagine, enact and sustain a transformed world and a way of life that is in balance with the
16
carrying capacity of our earth…” (Ziervogel et al. 2016 p. 955). Hence, transformative capacity
embraces the ability to envision change and the power to act.
In this thesis, the framework on transformative capacity presented by Ziervogel et al. (2016) is
used as it integrates ecological aspects along with social and governance aspects. The
framework (Figure 4) identifies three aspects of transformative capacity: awareness of and a
re-connection to life support systems; a well-developed sense of agency; and social cohesion.
Reconnecting to life-support systems requires an understanding of people’s dependence on the
earth and its resources (Ziervogel et al. 2016), and is a shift from the idea of humans dominating
the earth for their own benefit to humans living in harmony with nature (Folke et al. 2011).
Social cohesion entails building community ties and encouraging social networks and
processes where people can learn and create change together (Ziervogel et al. 2016). From a
food systems perspective this entails that food system actors see themselves as stewards of the
planet which is key to increasing human and planetary health (Gordon et al. 2017). Agency,
defined as “the deliberate exercise of individual or collective will" (Scoones et al. 2020 p. 67),
connects to innovation and being an active co-creator of the future. It embraces the
competencies of mobilizing stakeholders around a vision, engaging in networks, strengthening
social capital, and promoting local knowledge and experimentation (Dorado 2005, Westley et
al. 2013).
Figure 4: The three domains of transformative capacity from Ziervogel et. al (2016 p. 7)
17
The literature on sustainability transformation and transitions encompasses the concept of
scaling to discuss how an initiative can have a greater impact and contribute to a desired change
(Westley et al. 2014, Moore et al. 2015, Naber et al. 2017). Through scaling processes, seeds
can contribute to changing values and influencing the emergence of innovations (Bennett et al.
2016). Lam et al. (2020 p. 3) use the concept of amplification and define amplification
processes as “diverse actions deployed by sustainability initiatives together with other
actors…to purposively increase their transformative impact”. They developed a typology of
amplification processes based on six frameworks from social innovations, social-ecological
transformations and socio-technical transitions research. One main difference between the
work in these three areas is how they frame the system of interest where the former focuses on
leaders’ ability to initiate change while the other two adress the capacity of social-ecological
systems and non-linear change in socio-technical systems, respectively. In contrast, a similarity
is that they all recognize the following three dimensions of transformations: multilevel,
multiphase and cross-scale.
The typology by Lam et al. (2020) (Figure 5) includes three broad categories: amplifying
within, amplifying out and amplifying beyond. These categories are divided into eight specific
processes: stabilizing, speeding up, growing, replicating, transferring, spreading, scaling up
and scaling deep. Stabilizing refers to efforts aiming to make the impact of the initiative last
longer through increasing the resilience of the seed and to ensure its longevity while speeding
up refers to increasing the pace of change created. Growing implies that a seed reaches out to
more places and people and extends its impact range, while replicating denotes a process where
the seed is copied and planted in a different context. Transferring involves initiating a seed in
a similar context but independently from the original one. Likewise, spreading refers to when
an independent seed is emerging inspired by the original and in a dissimilar context. The last
two processes, scaling up and scaling deep, aim to impact institutions, policy, rules and laws,
and norms, values, and mindsets respectively.
18
Figure 5: Typology of amplification processes from Lam et al. (2020 p. 11)
Transforming mindsets of actors is an important factor for speeding up systemic change in the
food system (Herrero et al. 2020). Moore et al. (2015) argue that less mature initiatives often
focus on impacting more people or places and as they see a need for wider systemic change
they intensify their strategies to scale up and deep. For this to happen, transformative leadership
that can articulate visions, express enthusiasm and emphasize values are important (Wolfram
2016). However, a strong, single leader is not enough, even though individual agency is
important, since transformative agency needs to be distributed in the system (Westley et al.
2013, Moore et al. 2018).
Previous work shows the potential of food seeds to contribute to transformation. Hebinck et al.
(2020) conclude that urban food initiatives contribute in different ways to transformative
processes and outcomes while Vieira et al. (2019) find that food social enterprises have a strong
transformative potential within the social setting, and in operational, governance and
institutional aspects. Guerrero Lara et al. (2019) discuss the role of Traditional Ecological
Knowledge in transformations and emphasize the importance of traditional practices.
19
4. Methods
In this chapter, the methods used to explore the transformative potential and the amplification
processes employed by food seeds in Cape Town and Stockholm, are described.
4.1 Philosophical position and research design
The aim of this study is to understand how seeds and their transformative capacity have
developed over time. The seeds are situated in their local food-systems, which are social-
ecological systems, thus a system’s perspective lays a foundation for this thesis. Understanding
the seeds and their contexts requires involvement from representatives of the seeds and will
generate several perspectives of the reality in the two geographical sites. From an ontological
perspective, the underlying belief in this thesis is the existence of a real world regardless of
how we perceive it, while the understanding of this world, epistemology, is constructed by the
participants and the researcher, and thus cannot be purely objective. Hence, combining an
ontological perspective of realism with an epistemological perspective of constructivism, this
thesis aligns with critical realism (Maxwell 2013).
This research applies an iterative strategy (Bryman 2008) where theory is combined with
empirical data throughout the analysis. It aims to enhance and expand the theoretical insights
on transformation and transformational capacity of seeds. Because of the nature of the research
questions, the research is inspired by a case study design where the two different locations,
Cape Town and Stockholm, are used as geographical focus areas for the cases. The research
process is summarized in Figure 6.
20
Figure 6: Summary of the research process where several steps were carried out
simultaneously. Boxes shows what was done and clouds are ideas that shaped the process.
4.2 Data collection
4.2.1 Sampling
A purposive sampling process (Figure 7) was conducted to ensure that the best data possible
could be accessed. This sampling method is often used within a case study approach and allows
a selection of cases that contributes with different perspectives to the research problem
(Creswell and Poth 2018). Based on the purpose of this study and the SOGA-approach, the
criteria for participating seeds were:
- working in the margins of the local or regional food system with new or old ways of
thinking and/or doing.
- addressing social-ecological issues.
This study aims to follow up on seeds that participated in the studies by Björklund (2016) and
Markey (2017). Hence, the two geographical locations of the Stockholm region and greater
Cape Town were already given. First, I acquired information on nine seeds from Björklund
(2016) and 14 seeds from Markey (2017) and I contacted six seeds in Stockholm and 13 in
Cape Town. Of these, six and three seeds respectively agreed to participate. The seeds that
21
were not contacted were deemed not relevant due to changed operations or their location
outside the geographic area.
Due to a low number of seeds that were available to participate, additional methods were used.
For the Stockholm region, where the access to seeds was uncertain and delayed, I began
sampling based on Sellberg et al. (2020). From this I engaged four seeds. For Cape Town,
where no other studies were available to me, I used a snowballing technique to sample
additional seeds. Beginning with the recommendations from a key person within the local food
system and building on further suggestions, I engaged with eight additional initiatives. In total
I interviewed representatives from 21 seeds. One of them was not included in the final sample
since they did not sign the consent form.
Figure 7: Tree diagram showing the sampling process in Stockholm and Cape Town.
22
4.2.2 Data collection methods
As a first step in the data collection process I gathered information from the website or
Facebook-page of the seeds as well as from articles, reports, and other sources to inform the
interviews. Semi-structured interviews were conducted between November 2020 and February
2021. The participants were either the founder or a person in a managerial position or with a
responsibility for social or ecological aspects of the operations, since these individuals have
relevant insights for the study. The duration of the interviews was between one and two hours,
and they were conducted on Zoom except one that was done at the seed’s premises in
Stockholm and one that was conducted by phone. The interviews with seeds in Stockholm were
conducted in Swedish while in Cape Town, English was used. All interviews were recorded
and transcribed.
Planning the data collection included constructing a framework with sub-questions based on
the research questions and the literature review, specifically Lam et al.’s (2020) typology of
amplification processes. Based on this, the interview guide (Appendix 1) was developed in
which three themes (visionary food system, developments within the initiative, and successes
and challenges) with sub-points were formulated. Semi-structured interviews were used since
they allow for a flexible process (Bryman 2008) and for the interviewees to bring up
discussions important to them and to elaborate on specific topics. They also allow for me as an
interviewer to follow up on relevant themes.
4.3 Data analysis
The collection and analysis of data was kept broad and open to be able to notice new and
unpredictable themes. The study applied a mixed inductive and deductive approach in which
an iterative analysis where recording of emerging patterns in the data was done concurrently
with consulting existing theories and frameworks (Tracy 2013). This was done through a
process where theory and data were revisited several times. The interviews were transcribed as
soon as possible after being conducted to stay as true to the content as possible. The transcripts
in Swedish were translated into English.
The transcripts were subject to a thematic content analysis (Figure 8) and coded in several
cycles using Nvivo software (NVivo qualitative data analysis software; QSR International Pty
Ltd. Release 1.4.1). The first cycle consisted of descriptive coding (Saldaña 2016) to
summarize segments of the data as well as to find overarching categories of information. Codes
23
were developed based on established concepts and theories, primarily Lam et al.’s (2020)
amplification typology, and on findings from Björklund (2016) and Markey (2017). In addition,
codes related to descriptions of changes over time as well as other emerging themes in the data
were recorded.
A second round, using a mix of focused coding and axial coding following Saldaña (2016),
was undertaken to describe and delineate categories found in the first coding phase and to
determine their relevance. In this process, relevant codes were reorganized and clustered into
categories while redundant codes were merged or removed. In addition, the most frequent or
significant codes were identified to guide the subsequent analysis. The final coding structure
is presented in Appendix 2.
Figure 8: Description of the data analysis process.
To answer RQ1 I first consulted the main results (presented in chapter 5) from the studies by
Björklund (2016) and Markey (2017) and then compared my data to these results and identified
areas where there had been a change over time in the seeds’ strategies, activities, or capacities.
Then, I added other evidence from my data that indicated important developments within the
initiatives but had not been analysed in previous studies. These were compared to existing
theories of what enables transformative capacity. After reorganizing the two categories of
evidence: change as compared to results in the previous studies and change indicated by the
interviewees, four broad interrelated categories emerged: ecological processes, social
24
sustainability, agency and empowerment and financial viability. As a final step, these
categories were compared to and aligned with Ziervogel et al’s (2016) framework. In this
process, the last category, financial viability, was moved to the stabilizing process under RQ2,
as it was considered to rather be a prerequisite for transformative capacity, and not
transformative in itself.
For RQ2 and RQ3, the coding processes described above were guided by themes and concepts
based on Lam et al.’s (2020) typology of amplification processes. As a result of the axial
coding, I identified the three most frequently used amplification strategies and analysed them
further by creating sub-categories. Afterwards, I connected them to related barriers and
enablers identified within the data which were labelled as internal and external.
4.4 Limitations
A major constraint of the study is the limited number of seeds from previous studies that were
available for participation, limiting the external validity or generalisability (Bryman 2008).
This was addressed by analysing different aspects of transformative capacity and how they
have developed, rather than focusing individual capacities of specific seeds. However, the
results can still be used to expand on theory and shed light on theoretical frameworks to conduct
analytic generalization (Yin 2018). Furthermore, although some of the seeds in the study have
been existing for several years, most have not, and this short timeframe makes it more difficult
to say something about transformative capacity and to be able to measure their sustainability
impact. A longer temporal analysis where the seeds are followed closely would generate richer
descriptions of how transformative capacity develops over time. In addition, although the
framework from Ziervogel et al. (2016), that was used to align the aspects of transformative
capacity, integrate social and ecological aspects, it is less strong in shedding light on
governance and operational dimensions.
Due to the pandemic, online interviews were conducted and there was no possibility to visit
the seeds which would have given the opportunity to see production or retail facilities, meet
staff members etc. For the South African seeds, the impediment of not being able to experience
the local food system, is a major constraint for the study. However, the unique opportunity to
follow up on seeds from a previous study by using online interviews, outweighed this
constraint.
25
5. Results
This chapter presents the results of the study. It starts with a description of the included seeds
and their visions for a future food system while the remainder of the chapter is structured
according to the three research questions.
5.1 Seeds with similar visions of local food systems
The 20 seeds represented in this study comprise a diverse set of food systems actors including
businesses, non-governmental organisations, foundations, and chefs. Table 1 summarises their
attributes and activities. Similar visions for a future food system are noticable among seeds in
Cape Town and Stockholm. The features include primarily a local system with close
relationships and short supply chains supported by regional and global systems, a food
production based on agroecological and regenerative principles, and an increased awareness
about ecological, social and health-related issues connected to food. While the global food
system and the big actors have a role to play, the need to promote local production and
consumption of food as the foundation of the system is emphasized. Though the local contexts
differ, food systems in both places are impacted by globalisation and most seeds are inspired
by the same research, trends and ideas. Several of the South African participants have either
received training in, or have other connections with, Europe or America.
26
Table 1: Attributes and descriptions of the seeds in Cape Town and Stockholm
Seed
operation
employees
Description
Grönska SE Business Farming 5 – 15 13 Tech-company operating a vertical farm and selling farm produce such as
lettuce and herbs.
Ängsö fisk SE Business Farming 15+ 2 (15
seasonal)
methods.
Runs a café and shop where they sell their own fish.
Smakriket SE Business Wholesale 5 – 15 10 Brand of a distributing company focusing on origin and naturalness of
products.
Rosendal SE NGO Farming 15+ 25 (70
seasonal)
Foundation operating an open, biodynamic and regenerative garden.
Runs a café and a shop, has an outdoor classroom and offers courses in
gardening, foraging, baking and cooking.
Stefan E SE Independent
Cooking - - Independent chef focusing on sustainability and food raw materials.
Involved in “Chef of the Year”-competition, holds trainings for chefs and
supports food producers.
processing
5 – 15 2 Small-scale producer of artisanal food items from foraging in their organically
certified forest.
Promotes the taste of the wild and the Nordic. Runs a farm shop.
Swedish miller SE Business Farming/Milling 15+ 11 Family-owned farming and milling company focusing on heirloom varieties
and organic agriculture.
Works with the whole value chain and has a webshop.
Sébastien på
Söder
SE Business Baking 0 – 5 14 Artisanal baker focusing on seasonality, heirloom varieties, and organic food
raw materials.
Runs a café and has a webshop and offers courses in sourdough baking.
Kalf&Hansen SE Business Cooking 5 – 15 25-30 Nordic fast food restaurants focusing on organic, seasonal and sustainable
food.
Jannelunds
gård
SE Business Farming 15+ 2 Family-owned farm focusing on regenerative and organic agriculture.
Runs a farm shop, a webshop and a pop-up restaurant.
27
UCOOK SA Business Food delivery 5 – 15 170 Meal-kit delivery company focusing on local products, seasonality and natural
ingredients.
Abalimi.
Richard
Bosman
SA Business Processing 5 – 15 13 Charcutier using traditional methods to cure pasture-read and ethically
produced pork, beef and venison.
Runs a web shop, supplies wholesale and offers courses on curing.
Breadrev SA Business Baking 5 – 15 1 Consulting company supporting people in baking artisanal bread, building
wood-fired rocket ovens, and setting up bakeries.
PEDI SA NGO Farming 0 – 5 14 Organisation supporting emerging farmers with market access and training in
organic agriculture.
Neihgbourhood
farm
SA NGO Farming 0 – 5 19 Organisation promoting local socio-economic development and food security.
Intalls and supports market gardens, neighbourhood markets, outdoor
classrooms.
Abalimi SA NGO Farming 15+ 11 Organisation supporting small-scale farmers through training, access to
resources through garden centres, infrastructure support and market access.
Artisanal baker SA Business Baking 5 – 15 100+ Artisanal baker focusing on locally sourced ingredients and ancient methods.
Runs several cafés and serves supermarkets with frozen products.
Meuse farm SA Business Farming 0 – 5 5 Small-scale vegetable garden producing specialty veg and herbs using organic
principles.
Delivers to restaurants, through veg boxes and donates to a local NGO.
Ocean View
Organics)
SA Business Farming 0 – 5 5 A primary cooperative of five black women farmers that emerged from the
closure of the Neighbourhood Farm urban farming training programme.
Focus on organic agriculture and indigenous plants, and runs a market garden,
plant nursey and a café.
Janse SA Independent
chef
Cooking - - Independent chef focusing on farm to fork, traceability and to reduce the
environmental footprint of his restaurants.
Participated in
5.2 Developing transformative capacity in the niche
This section shows how transformative capacity of the seeds has developed over time. The
baseline, consisting of results from Björklund (2016) and Markey (2017), is presented in Table
2. The findings reveal three aspects in which change over time could be linked to transformative
capacity: ecological processes, social sustainability, and empowerment and agency. Each of
these were aligned with Ziervogel et al.’s (2016) framework on transformative capacities and
are presented below.
Table 2: Summary of findings from Björklund (2016) and Markey (2017)
Theme Result Study
Reconnecting to the
environmental values and contribute to an environmentally
aware food culture.
based on their systems understanding.
Björklund (2016)
and underline that food needs to taste good to attract
customers.
Seeds aim to achieve transformation of the bread industry
by scaling out their own production model to bakers in low
income areas, leaving the ownership to local communities
to increase their food security and develop a sense of
community.
Agency and innovation Niche-actors handle challenges through different types of
social-ecological innovation.
Björklund (2016)
Agency and innovation Interaction between the niche and the regime is low.
Engaging with the regime is not an active strategy to
achieve transformation in the food system.
Markey (2017)
Agency and innovation Success of innovation depends on sharing of ideas and
knowledge, experimentation and creativity.
Agency and innovation Seeds are actively mobilizing food awareness and
stimulating change through awareness creation about
healthy food.
Björklund (2016)
Markey (2017)
Agency and innovation Niche-actors identify as being part of a larger movement
and networks have evolved.
5.2.1 Biosphere – reconnecting to life-support systems
The analysis shows how seeds are working with ecological processes and connecting people to
life-supporting systems by applying different strategies (see Table 3). Seeds use modern ideas
and technology in combination with traditional ways to reconnect to the biosphere, for example
by using online applications facilitating for customers to buy food produced using traditional
techniques such as no-tilling. Activities to reconnect with the biosphere, learning about social-
ecological systems and finding new methods and approaches are important. One participant
explains how they work with a researcher to find ways of increasing production while
29
enhancing the positive effects on ecosystems. Other participants describe that they improve
stewardship through setting up Participatory Guarantee Systems (PGS), local quality assurance
systems certifying producers (IFOAM 2020).
Some seeds are explicitly working with education and connecting to youth and school children
through open gardens, outdoor classrooms and by supporting constructions of school gardens.
Creating a reconnection to the life-supporting systems and increasing knowledge about
agriculture and food produtcion are often key purposes of these activities.
“The reason why we are doing that is because a 16-year old from the school walked
in here one day when we were harvesting carrots and she said “wow I thought
carrots grew on trees”. That is at the age of 16. So this farm is actually beautiful
as it is going to introduce you to agriculture.” (Ocean View Organic Farmers)
All these processes have developed over time and a temporal comparison also indicates that
there is an increasing number of suppliers of organic and regenerative produce, which
facilitates for seeds to use their systems understanding to source ecologically and ethically
produced food.
Aim Example Evidence Cape Town Evidence Stockholm
To learn about
ecosystems to be
able to contribute
food web and that really
emphasized that the
web, so we started to do a bit
more compostee spraying in
the soil food web in our
plants.” (Meuse farm)
would transition in some
(Jannelunds gård)
price for the meat and utilize
that meat and sell it to the
right customer who
when I started it was one
person that I could buy from in
terms of pig farmers that was
doing pasture and things, now
I am buying from three and
there are two more that I
potentially could buy from.“
volume, that the suppliers
us and it asks questions
about what we are looking
for for next year and they
change their production
5.2.2 Social cohesion and community engagement
Social cohesion and community engagement, and the notion that food is part of our culture and
social life, are highlighted as important aspects of the seeds’ work. While mobilization and
engagement are nothing new, the findings reveal that seeds deliberately improve on this over
time and strive to be a positive social actor in their local context (see Table 4). The baseline
shows that this has been, and continuous to be, an important aspect in the South African context
in particular. In Cape Town, several NGOs implement activities involving the local
community, such as having Opens Days at the farm, selling produce locally and engaging with
local community networks. In addition to that, businesses contribute to social cohesion by
building a community of followers, or by employing local staff. In Stockholm several seeds
are building social cohesion indirectly through their shops and cafés which become meeting
places, and they find that their activity creates a sense of pride among the local community.
“I think the direct contact to the customers in the farm shop is important, it feels
like a lot of people appreciate that it's a local context. It feels like it has been
valuable for people especially in the last year when you have not been able to do
much else so many people have appreciated coming to the store every week,
chatting with us, and I think that will stay the same afterwards, that you understand
or value it more.” (Jannelunds gård)
Participants describe how they see an increasing interest and willingness to act among
individuals and other actors. Their organisation or business is attracting people who share the
same interests and values, and who want to belong to a like-minded community.
31
Table 4: Social cohesion and community engagement - examples and evidence
Aim Example Evidence Cape Town Evidence Stockholm
To provide a
meeting place and
organize events in
important thing that has come
out of the year here is that
there is now a hub of activity
where likeminded people are
have discussion on how do we
move everything to something
more sustainable, not just
place for these grower groups
to come and get advice,
seedlings, and compost.”
(Ocean View Organic
ended up in Hällesfornsäs
find that people want to be
proud that we are
that you're also giving
something back to the
belonging and learn a
central production facility,
because the bulk of our staff,
our working staff, are people
from the townships, lower
they have a good attitude and
take my rigorous methods,
we have seen coming form the
street and who are now
proper trained artisan baker,
pastry chefs, cooks, chefs.”
round which also makes
permanent jobs all year
have worked with people
who recently arrived in
Sweden and people who
have been outside the
labour market, and we
employment services.”
5.2.3 Agency and innovation
Seeds are active agents trying to change the system in which they operate (see Table 5). They
encourage agency by facilitating opportunities for people to influence the local food system
through their consumption and behavior, for example by providing knowledge and helping
consumers make informed decisions. Agency is enabled in activities as seeds, staff, members,
and partners are strengthened in their ability to act. All seeds interact with other actors to work
efficiently and qualitatively towards their aim as well as influencing the system, and
collaborative patterns are emerging with an increasing number of actors involved.
“I sit in Matklustret.se which is an economic association in Sörmland, covering
both producers, processors, restaurants, those who want to work with good food,
and there we work to strengthen each other and not necessarily to connect with the
32
big systems, but to find other solutions… And there you have joined forces, it
started with ten but now it is up to 15 different producers I think.” (Högtorp gård)
Trust and shared values are key factors for seeds to connect and collaborate. Networks and
collaborations allow for knowledge exchange and sharing of experiences which are used for
developing and improving the seeds. Despite increasing partnerships, the interaction between
the niche and the regime remains limited, and there are no clear indications that the niches
destabilize the regime. However, some seeds do work with medium-large corporations and
participants experience an increasing interest and demand for their work.
Innovation within the seeds encompasses doing things in new ways to take better care of
ecosystems, for example developing better fishing tackle, or doing new actions ain the local
context such as cover cropping. Both agency and innovation are aspects of transformative
capacity identified in the baseline where networking, experimentation, exchange of knowledge,
and increasing food awareness are highlighted.
Table 5: Agency and innovation - examples and evidence
Aim Example Evidence Cape Town Evidence Stockholm
To
collaborate
increased when seeds
new solutions.
during Covid that
partnerships are just
stretched for resources and
do I do best and what do
you do best and I am not
going to try to do two things
but rather partner and do it
together... And yeah I think
that is something that is
kind of happening which is
amazing.”
(UCOOK)
10 years we have had a
large Nordic conference and
whole of Europe where
have seminars and
exhibitions. It's really
grown a lot in the last 15
years.” (Swedish miller)
empower people within their
are trying to get it there, we
handed over our clients to
the farmers so that they can
service them directly. So
where we were a
orders directly from the
hotels and deliver it
people who want training or
who want an education and
need experience… We've
care of interns lately. What
we are looking at now is that
we are going to have
alternative education where
season.” (Rosendals
5.3 Amplifying impact to contribute to sustainability
The results show that seeds are applying processes within all three categories of amplification
strategies: amplifying within, amplifying out and amplifying beyond. While all processes are
used to some extent (see Appendix 3), some are more commonly applied (Figure 8). In the
following section I discuss the three main processes employed: stabilizing, scaling deep and
growing.
Figure 9: Frequency of amplifying processes applied by seeds (each seed can apply more
than one process).
5.3.1 Stabilizing
One feature of stabilizing is a clear focus and strategy for the seed which contributes to its
longevity. This involves setting goals, refocusing, scaling down and professionalize. One
participant explains how their goal was too broad and too inclusive to have an impact and how
they began refocusing their objectives (Breadrev). Developing strategies and realising plans
involve finding partners who provide support in terms of knowledge, networks, and/or financial
capital through investments or donations. In turn, this allows seeds to become professional and
financially viable. One interviewee describes that after partnering with a business-minded
individual, the organisation became more stable and efficient (Artisanal baker).
Another feature relates to building resilience of the seed and thereby increasing its stability and
longevity, which seeds are doing continuously. One participant describes how they develop
their own technology to avoid expensive investment, another one how they diversify their
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Stabilizing Scaling deep Growing Scaling up Speeding up Transferring Spreading Replicating
34
activities and a third explains how they develop internal systems to increase local ownership
and management:
“So it just takes time to develop those systems and I am proud to say now, we are
not there yet, but I would say in the next year I can walk away from the farms in
their entirety and the distribution and they can run on their own without me.“
(Neighbourhood farm)
5.3.2 Scaling deep
The majority of seeds scale deep and the need for information, knowledge and communication
to customers and clients on how, by whom and where the food has been produced is
emphasized. Storytelling is an important tool to spread messages and influence behavior. The
need to tell a story is bigger today as it creates more of an experience and within the eco-
gastronomic niche, storytelling is a powerful tool to increase awareness. A chef explains:
“Just everything had like a story, everyone knew where every single thing on the
dish was from, how it was grown, what cultivar, seasonality…. And something that
we pride ourselves with was having this that everyone was telling the same story
in their own way.” (Arno J.)
Close relationships with customers and clients are described as rewarding and useful for
conveying stories. Though seeds are organizing events and strive to be a meeting place in their
local community, the most frequent method to reach out is through social media, which is
emphasized as a useful tool to effectively communicate with customers and followers.
Participants emphasize the importance of making sustainable food appealing. A lot of effort
has to be put into this aspect, both in producing or serving delicious food that looks beautiful
but also in the communication regarding food and the environment. Several participants
describe how their product or service is a good alternative but also makes people question and
challenge the current system. A charcutier illustrates the effects of his courses:
“So even though some people still do carry on as a hobby and they never buy bacon
again, the other 80% either become customers of mine or they know what questions
to ask so they stop buying mass produced bacon because they understand what it
is.” (Richard Bosman)
In comparison to the baseline, seeds continue to create awareness about the current food
systems and the negative outcomes by showing good examples, offering tasty and healthy food
35
and using food as an entry point to discuss and increase the understanding of the connections
to the planet and the community.
5.3.3 Growing
Seeds mainly apply two different approaches for growing: finding more customers within their
niche, or expanding beyond the niche and collaborating with retailers and other actors at the
meso-level while keeping its niche-characteristics. Some seeds are combining the two
strategies, recognizing that reaching out to a larger customer base and working in partnerships
with actors at the regime level is key to increase accessibility. One baker is expanding his
original idea of high-quality artisan bread for high-end coffee shops to producing bread for the
less affluent segments. This paves the way to introduce a less expensive range of bread into
retailers’ assortment. Another baker explains his strategy:
“To everyone and then niched at the same time. You don't have to niche yourself
and exclude, niche is about values, what you believe in… I want diversity, I want
to promote diversity and create diversity.” (Sebastién på Söder)
Seeds also work simultaneously within the niche and with the regime to generate a stable
income which allows them to grow, stabilize and work regeneratively. They use several
methods to reach out such as opening stores in their vicinity, developing online shops to reach
beyond their local context and working together with other actors. The data implies that seeds
are approached by people or companies who want to work with them, which indicates that
momentum is being built.
“But then after a while we didn't have to go out actively but people got in touch
with us….We've always had customers so we've been busy. We have not put a lot
of energy into bringing in new customers.” (Swedish miller)
36
Following the description of the amplifying processes, this section describes the main barriers
and enablers for seeds to employ these processes (see summary in Table 6 and 7).
5.4.1 Barriers to apply amplification strategies
Lack of knowledge is identified as one important factor influencing seeds’ ability to amplify
and the knowledge gaps include communication skills, sustainability knowledge, business and
marketing etc. Another frequently addressed internal barrier is the limited access to resources,
not only financial capital but also physical capital. Additionally, management and internal
systems are identified as internal barriers, where a lack of agency is sometimes experienced.
External barriers include the food culture and a low awareness among consumers. A lack of
knowledge about healthy food and sustainable food production is perceived as a main barrier.
This is related to another external barrier: people’s preference for convenience and low
willingness or ability to pay the real value of food. The convenience factor and undervaluing
of food is accentuated by seeds from both Cape Town and Stockholm.
A second domain relates to market access, infrastructure and logistics. For a small-scale
business it can be challenging to buy directly from suppliers and producers as it entails
maintaining contact and handling administration. Several participants describe how they try to
be knowledgeable about the whole value chain in order to better understand the supply chain
and to increase the quality and efficiency of their work. Policy, regulations and corporate power
are mentioned as other barriers.
A third major issue is capital mobilisation. This challenge is different for the businesses and
the NGOs, where the former need to find investors or raise capital on their own, whereas NGOs
are more dependent on donors for financial stability. In the South African context, corruption
and crime were raised as issues hindering or limiting initiatives to operate.
37
Table 6: Descriptions and examples of barriers to apply amplification processes
Barrier Description Example
financial organization.
“If you're small like us, you can't do much... If you have
money, you have power, then you could... It would be
different then. But if you don't have money and just have
ideas...” (Ängsö)
up appropriate internal
impact.
“I never really invested in the type of staff that could do
that…And the times that I did, I felt that I as a business
owner was not necessarily a good enough leader for them to
be optimized, so actually in many cases when I did appoint
specialized, experienced qualified staff I felt like my lack of
knowledge limited them.” (Artisanal baker)
External
Culture,
convenience
seeds to amplify.
“That's the convenience, it's by far the biggest obstacle of
all. And I'm not saying that you have to sacrifice
convenience, that's not what it's all about. But rather to get
uncomfortable thinking in a different way” (Rosendals
trädgård)
new markets, rigid structures
down the process.
“So when we look at emerging farmers trying to grow into
agri-business and starting farms, what we have seen…is
that farmers try to feed into this system but the barriers for
quality and quantity and standards keep them out of the
system.” (PEDI)
for a business or a project is a
barriers, often connected to
financial viability,
“Part of the problem I think is that the seed capital is given
to new initiatives, but they don’t look at the ongoing input
costs that are required, so we found it increasingly hard to
raise additional funding to continue the work that we do.”
(Neighbourhood farm)
Passion and interest for food and environmental sustainability are motivators for seeds to
amplify impacts and overcome challenges. The desire to show an example of how to contribute
to ecological, social and economic sustainability is also driving seeds to increase their impact.
Other key enablers are persistence, experimentation and time. Many seeds emphasize the need
to try things repeatedly, and not to give in to failure in, whether in innovation or
communication. Furthermore, farmers, processors as well as chefs describe a feeling of
responsibility that pushes them to work in a certain way.
The main external driver is the trends in society. One chef describes how they see that more
companies have policies on serving vegetarian food in their meetings, which is a positive
development, but if that trend is reversed, the food industry might return to conventionally
produced food. The societal trends also influence the participants’ willingness and
effectiveness of scaling deep. Increasing number of actors working within the same niche or
38
with similar values is a motivator and inspiration, and participants explain that talking about
food and sustainability has become much easier in the last 5-10 years. Additionally, the recent
pandemic has contributed to an increasing interest and awareness of locally produced food
which has been a driver for the seeds to develop their products to the local market. Another
factor is awards and recognition in media. These are important as they contribute to increasing
attention, but they also serve as an encouragement and a boost for the seeds to continue and
improve their work.
Table 7: Descriptions and examples of enablers to amplify impact
Enabler Description Example
driver for their work.
“So I think again at the core of UCOOK’s kind of
philosophy we’re actually to rebrand and our slogan is
good food good people. And so it really speaks to the idea of
wanting to deliver on a really like a high quality product
that has a positive impact on the environment and the
society and that is set within...with people at the core of it.”
(UCOOK)
and allow time for
experimentation.
“There is a lot of trial and error, and we realise that there
are a lot of things that have not been done before that we
have to do and then you cannot have too strong a selection
process on what you have experience of, but you have to
dare to do new things.” (Smakriket)
Sense of
to act and use their knowledge
and skills to contribute to
change.
“So my decision affects the whole chain, production and
consumption. If I choose the wrong raw material, then
people eat the wrong food… The power is in the hands of
those who refine, chefs, bakers, etc.” (Sébastien på Söder)
External
experience their work to
methods.
“After all, these are issues that are on the agenda now and
that are super important to many and there is
discussion…there is a way to do it now without it being
problematic. After all, you can open a restaurant that only
cooks everything according to EAT lancet report or
according to WWF's guide…So you can do that now…15
years ago it was impossible basically.” (Stefan E.)
Awards and
work they do is important for
the seeds and an
doing what they do.
“They're very important. And we got a price a few weeks
ago and that makes us stick to what we're doing…Paving
the way for something is pretty tough… So it means an
incredible amount. It's great fun. It means a lot to our
producers and to our staff and to everyone.”
(Kalf&Hansen)
6. Discussion
This chapter discusses the findings presented in the previous chapter and focuses on three major
themes; building momentum, scaling deep, and rethinking transformation. The analysis gives
a holisitic picture of how transformative capacity among the seeds developed over time and
what processes are applied to increase the transformative impact. Although the two frameworks
used for the analysis slightly overlap, they are useful to show a change over time in aspects of
capacities, and processes applied by seeds to increase impact.
6.1 Building momentum through collaboration within the niche
Findings suggest that food seeds potentially contribute to transformation within food systems
in similar ways in Sweden and South Africa, although the context is different. The niches of
seeds in Cape Town and Stockholm are developing and expanding over time, building
momentum through collaborations, resource mobilisation and innovation. Meanwhile seeds are
increasing their own transformative capacity within the three aspects; reconnecting to the
biosphere, social cohesion and agency, they also contribute to improving other seeds’ capacity
through networks and collaborations, thus having a transformative impact (Bennett et al. 2016).
These trends among seeds align with the essential components for food movements to push
transformation as identified by IPES-Food and ETC Group (2021): collaboration across
multiple scales; broad alliances and re-structured relationships; and readiness for change.
Although momentum is building up in this preparation-phase when seeds increase in number,
grow stronger, and collaborate with more and diverse actors, there are no indications that the
seeds are destabilizing the dominant regime as such.
Transformations in social-ecological systems require skills that go beyond the capabilities of
individual actors. Interacting with others is key to creating transformation across a system and
niches have a better chance to be successful if they engage in social network building,
articulation of visions, and learning processes (Ziervogel et al. 2016, Naber et al. 2017). The
findings show a diversity of partnerships and collaborations ranging from business relations,
to mutually beneficially learning exchanges and participation in research and policy
development, some of which if developed further potentially could result in the creation of
proto-regimes (Pereira et al. 2018). These collaborations are established primarily within the
niche, but they also begin to appear between the niche and the regime.
40
Trust related to networks and leadership is identified as an important feature for transformation
(Folke et al. 2005, Olsson et al. 2006, Herrfahrdt-Pähle et al. 2020). Building trust among actors
in the food sector is vital to broad collaborations and shared values on food system’s outcomes,
and it is an essential element for accelerating systemic transformation (Herrero et al. 2020).
This is supported by the findings, showing that trust and shared values are key for seeds to start
connecting and collaborating. The shared values relate to ecology, sustainability, social
impacts, and ethical considerations such as regenerative farming, social cohesion, animal
welfare and fair prices. As important features of social capital, trust and shared values can be
a comparative advantage to entrepreneurs and forerunners as they facilitate cooperation
(Larsson et al. 2016).
6.2 Scaling deep – efforts towards a more equitable food system?
Scaling deep is a frequent amplification strategy applied by the seeds and an important feature
in their work. This points to the transformative potential of seeds given that interventions in
values are theoretically deep leverage points for system transformation (Horcea-Milcu et al.
2019). The majority of seeds, including newer ones, try to change values and behavior,
contradicting Moore et al.’s (2015) suggestion that less mature seeds focus on replication rather
than scaling deep or up. Hence, a topic for future research could be to look at if there are
differences in strategies applied by seeds depending on how long they have been operating.
Multiple strategies to change values and norms are applied by seeds to mobilize food awareness
and to bring consumers closer to Earth’s life-supporting system. Moreover, information and
knowledge are recognized as tools to address the fact that consumers have become more
decoupled from production (Gordon et al. 2017). Furthermore, influencing people through
deliciousness of food and using the taste and the beauty of food as an opportunity to talk about
ecology and sustainability becomes more common. An increasing interest in eating organic and
healthy food, and a growing concern about the environment (Martin and Brandão 2017,
Metelerkamp et al. 2020), are explanatory factors, which also contribute to the willingness of
seeds to work within their niche. Moreover, Räsänen et al. (2019) show that transformative
changes is not solely decided by transformative capacity but also by overall change in the
society, which indicates a need to further explore opportunity contexts of seeds.
Despite the positive development in scaling deep and growing to amplify impact, the aspect of
accessibility, as recognized by Björklund (2016) and Markey (2017), is still a challenge.
Mabhaudhi et al. (2018) show that access to the food system is influenced by inequalities and
41
power imbalances, which in the South African context is a legacy of apartheid. A large share
of the people in Cape Town and Stockholm regions are not reached by the seeds, either because
consumers act by convenience, lack knowledge or cannot afford to buy the products. The price
of food and convenience are two major barriers to a larger transformation of the food system
(Nicol and Taherzadeh 2020) and healthy diets are often unaffordable for poor people (FAO et
al. 2020). Therefore, the question of how less affluent people can afford sustainable and healthy
food needs to be addressed.
Faber and Drimie (2016) argue that developing people’s own food production, connecting
smallholder farmers to the local food system, and better agricultural policies are needed to
address the food system challenges faced in South Africa. In Cape Town, a number of seeds
working within the less affluent communities strive to make their products accessible and to
support people to grow their own food and create employment. In this way smallholder farmers,
who are disempowered because of poverty and gendered access to resources (Mabhaudhi et al.
2018), can become important players in the food system. In Stockholm, none of the included
seeds has a clear mission of making healthy and sustainable food accessible to the poorest
segments of the population, but there are those who attempt to increase accessibility through
affordable pricing and larger volumes.
An interesting development which could be subject to further research is how two seeds in
Cape Town are innovating within their businesses to target the mass market and increase the
accessibility of their products outside the niche. Basing their business on a high ecological
standard for a niche market, they are now aiming to address the inequity in the accessibility of
healthy food by developing products that meet those needs while being sustainably produced
and sold at a lower price. They use creativity and innovation to increase accessibility of healthy
and sustainable food for all, as called for by Pereira et al. (2019). Future research could follow
up these initiatives to see if they manage to keep their standards when increasing accessibility,
and to see how transformative initiatives can reach out to all segments in society to contribute
to a fair and just food system.
42
While most transformation literature discusses transformation on a large scale, transformation
as growing bigger and scaling out (Smith 2007, Dias and Partidário 2019), this research
contributes to broader models of transformation (Pereira et al. 2019, Vandeventer et al. 2019)
in which diversity, collaboration, quality, and place are accentuated. Complementary ideas that
focus less on aspects of growth and domination (becoming a new ‘regime’) and more on small-
scale actors, diversity and locality is needed to expand on transformation theory. This way of
thinking aligns with Shove and Walker (2007) who contend that focusing on large-scale
systemic transition, large actors such as big business is in the center of the analysis while the
small-scale actors and day-to-day decisions are often neglected to the detriment of
understanding how to enable transformative change.
A main strength of the transformative capacity of small- or medium scale, local actors lies
within their close relations to suppliers, consumers, clients, and local communities, and in their
ambition and motivation to pursue a different strategy than the conventional. Their radical ideas
in combination with little steps towards visions of future food systems resonates with Göpel’s
(2016) discussion on radical incremental transformation strategies. Another strength is the
seeds’ openness to collaborate, which can be an important driving force to induce systemic
change (Gorissen et al. 2018). Transformation involves breaking down current structures while
building the alternatives (Herrfahrdt-Pähle et al. 2020) and though the seeds do not explicitly
break down structures, they are building alternative ones that could challenge current structures
when the larger context is more ready for change. As niches grow within the food systems,
pushing for localization and agroecology, they create a tension with the prevailing food regime
(McMichael 2009, Holt Giménez and Shattuck 2011).
There is no single one solution to a sustainable future, but strategies to arrive there must take
many forms (Walker et al. 2004). The seeds in this study do not directly challenge the current
economic system as such, but their visions, objectives, and methods entail a different system
configuration. Diversity of initiatives and different abilities to contribute to transformation is
discussed by Hebinck et al. (2020) who use transformative processes and transformative
outcomes in their analysis of urban food initiatives. A diversity of seeds brings a diversity of
transformative outcomes such as changed diets and improved connections to nature. While
some seeds are growing bigger, many explicitly stay within their niche and others develop a
hybrid model. Intentionally remaining within the niche, but reaching out to more people is
43
often a strategic choice with the aim of having a deeper impact within the local context while
creating a financially viable organization. The seeds’ capacity to develop transformative
potential and apply amplification strategies is dependent on their ability to be financially viable,
a cross-cutting strategy for transformative capacity and amplification (Moore et al. 2015).
In summary, this research challenges traditional thinking about scaling transformations into a
regime and suggests that small-scale initiatives do not necessarily have to grow big and become
an alternative to the current regime in order to be transformative. Rather I contend that they
can contribute to transformation through creating vibrant niches in which diverse seeds with
transformative capacity support and inspire other initiatives, and scale deep to facilitate for
individuals to change their norms, values and behaviour towards food. In such a model,
transformation would entail that various niches coexist within a landscape without a dominant
regime in place. While this idea needs further analysis, it could be a seed to a revised theory of
change.
44
This study analysed seeds’ transformative capacity through a longitudinal lens and the
strategies applied by the seeds to amplify their impact. It shows that momentum is built when
food niches in Greater Cape Town and Stockholm city-region expand over time and as new
seeds appear in the niche. Over time, existing seeds are developing transformative capacity
through a stronger connection to the biosphere, increased community engagement and
broadened agency and innovation. Processes undertaken by the seeds to amplify their
transformative impact point in the same direction in both geographical locations where
stabilizing, growing, and scaling deep are the most recurrent ones. There is a tendency within
the food n