This paper investigates the current research on how consumers select the foods they buy and how they define ‘quality’. Consumer decisions are complex and whilst a few consumers prioritise local above all other factors when selecting food, for most local is simply one of multiple factors which influence the food choices they make. Short Food Chains are not necessarily local but are based on supply chains with fewer steps in the chain from producer to consumer. Short Food Chains ensure that

This analysis evaluates a real world complex intervention to study the impacts of an agricultural value chain development program on livelihood outcomes, in hill and mountainous regions of Nepal. The intervention was not designed for the study and no baseline data existed to compare the final outcomes. Data came from a carefully designed household survey administered to 3,028 households (50% beneficiaries and other 50% non-beneficiaries) across seven districts in Western Nepal.

This study aims to analyse three case studies of smallholder dairy farming in Pakistan. The study involved two stages. The first stage involved a scoping study which used a purposive sampling method to identify and sample fresh, unpackaged milk and informal and formal chains in both districts. Twenty-seven producers, eleven small, eight medium and five large Dhodhis, twenty-two retailers, two formal processors and eleven consumers were interviewed personally by the first author, using four different questionnaires.

A “farmers’ market” identifies a common area where farmers meet periodically to sell food products which do not need to be processed before consumption. Farmers’ markets have recently experienced steady growth mainly due to increasing demand for traditional foods and rising consumers’ interest towards locally produced food products. It is also the case that they provide transparency along the supply chain and decrease information asymmetries.

This paper makes a contribution to understanding the impact of relational trust, as embodied within bonding, bridging and linking social capital, on rural innovation. Using cases of multi-stakeholder groups who work together on shared problems it explores how social capital and different forms of trust (companion, competence and commitment) influence rural innovation processes. Looking at both the ‘bright’ and ‘dark’ side of social capital, our focus is on how social capital and trust constrain and enable the process of innovation.

This paper makes a contribution to understanding the impact of relational trust, as embodied within bonding, bridging and linking social capital, on rural innovation. Using cases of multi-stakeholder groups who work together on shared problems it explores how social capital and different forms of trust (companion, competence and commitment) influence rural innovation processes. Looking at both the ‘bright’ and ‘dark’ side of social capital, our focus is on how social capital and trust constrain and enable the process of innovation.

On-farm agricultural innovation through incorporation of new technologies and practices requires access to resources such as knowledge, financial resources, training, and even emotional support, all of which require the support of different actors such as peers, advisors, and researchers. The literature has explored the support networks that farmers use and the overall importance ranking of different support actors, but it has not looked in detail at how these networks may differ for different farmers.

 A paradigm shift is needed to reposition the world’s AFS from being an important driver of environmental degradation to being a key contributor for the global transition to sustainability. Such a transformation can only happen through both generation of new knowledge and enhanced translation of knowledge into use. This achievement requires the generation of new knowledge and enhanced translation of knowledge into use, entailing considerable efforts in terms of research and innovation.