[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"item-1245":3,"related-1245":60},{"id":4,"title":5,"url":6,"summary":7,"summary_zh":8,"content":8,"source_name":9,"source_url":6,"published_at":10,"category":11,"cover_url":8,"hotness":12,"is_selected":13,"score":14,"score_detail":15,"sources":17,"tags":19,"primary_topic":8,"secondary_topics":21,"classification":22,"search_phrases":35,"slug":36,"view_count":30,"doi":37,"paper":38,"created_at":59},1245,"Institutional arrangements, social relations, and food loss and waste in Tanzania’s export avocado value chain","https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3389\u002Ffsufs.2026.1834647","Food loss and waste (FLW) in low- and middle-income countries is often framed as a problem of technical inefficiency, poor infrastructure, or inadequate post-harvest handling. Such explanations, however, give insufficient attention to the institutional arrangements and social relations through which FLW is produced and unevenly distributed. This study examines how governance arrangements, power asymmetries, and risk-allocation practices shape FLW in Tanzania’s export avocado value chain. It draws on multi-sited qualitative research conducted across the Northern and Southern Highlands of Tanzania between 2018 and 2022, supplemented by follow-up interviews in 2024. A total of 114 in-depth interviews were conducted with farmers, exporters, farmer-group representatives, field officers, packhouse actors, and government stakeholders, together with 15 days of go-along participant observation during harvesting, grading, sorting, and packhouse processing. The findings identify four modes of selling relations: contracted out-grower arrangements, direct selling through non-contracted farmer groups, mediated selling through cooperatives and associations, and spot buying or side-selling. Across these arrangements, FLW resulted not only from the material perishability of avocados or failure to meet quality standards, but also from unequal control over harvesting decisions, opaque pricing and grading systems, contract sanctions, selective buying practices, delayed harvesting, and inequitable rejection-sharing mechanisms, and farmers’ own risk-avoidance strategies. The study shows that exporters and buyers often reduced their exposure to market and quality risks by shifting costs and uncertainty onto farmers. Farmers responded through strategies such as side-selling and increasing farmgate weight by harvesting immature fruit or non-exportable avocado varieties, which can generate further losses and waste. By demonstrating that FLW is a material outcome of how power, value, risk, and responsibility are organised within export-oriented horticultural chains, the paper contributes to critical FLW scholarship and calls for interventions that go beyond technical fixes to address transparent pricing and grading, farmer representation, fairer contractual arrangements, strengthened producer organisations and more equitable risk-sharing arrangements across the value chain.",null,"Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems","2026-08-25T00:00:00Z","论文",10,false,0,{"impact":14,"substance":14,"depth":14,"authority":14,"freshness":14,"relevant":14,"comment":16},"主题为坦桑尼亚牛油果价值链中的食物损耗与浪费，不涉及中国三农或农业信息化，相关性不足。",[18],{"name":9,"url":6},[20],"农业价值链",[],{"status":23,"locked":13,"version":24,"method":25,"evidence":26},"needs_review","2026-10-22.2","rules",{"candidates":27,"agricultural_evidence":13,"reason":34},[28],{"code":29,"score":30,"supported":13,"title":31,"abstract":32,"tags":33},"G3",1,[],[],[20],"农业相关性需要复核",[],"Institutionalarrangements,socialrelation-1245","10.3389\u002Ffsufs.2026.1834647",{"doi":37,"openalex_id":39,"authors":40,"venue":9,"cited_by_count":14,"oa_url":51,"card":52,"direction":56,"ingested_from":58},"W7204176867",[41,44,46,49],{"name":42,"orcid":43},"Jonas Cromwell","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0003-0122-2484",{"name":45,"orcid":8},"Stephen Whitfield",{"name":47,"orcid":48},"Megan Blake","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0002-8487-8202",{"name":50,"orcid":8},"Claire Helen Quinn","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.frontiersin.org\u002Fjournals\u002Fsustainable-food-systems\u002Farticles\u002F10.3389\u002Ffsufs.2026.1834647\u002Fpdf",{"tldr":53,"method":54,"finding":55,"direction":56,"opportunity":57},"研究坦桑尼亚出口牛油果价值链中制度安排与社会关系如何影响食物损失与浪费。","多地点定性研究，2018-2024年114次深度访谈及参与式观察。","FLW源于权力不对称、风险转移及不公平合同，而非仅技术问题。","农业人工智能与决策模型","可探索公平合同与风险共担机制对减少FLW的影响，结合数据驱动决策支持系统。","openalex","2026-09-01T04:03:09.452832Z",{"total":61,"page":30,"page_size":61,"items":62},2,[63,114],{"id":64,"title":65,"url":66,"summary":67,"summary_zh":8,"content":8,"source_name":68,"source_url":66,"published_at":69,"category":11,"cover_url":8,"hotness":12,"is_selected":13,"score":70,"score_detail":71,"sources":78,"tags":80,"primary_topic":8,"secondary_topics":84,"classification":85,"search_phrases":100,"slug":103,"view_count":30,"doi":104,"paper":105,"created_at":113},3755,"Crowding-in pathways in inclusive agribusiness partnerships: Towards a heuristic for responsible scaling","https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1016\u002Fj.agsy.2026.104978","Crowding-in pathways in inclusive agribusiness partnerships: Towards a heuristic for responsible scaling。Agricultural Systems","Agricultural Systems","2026-09-28T00:00:00Z",59,{"impact":72,"substance":73,"depth":74,"authority":75,"freshness":76,"relevant":30,"comment":77},8,14,15,13,9,"核心期刊论文，提出包容性农业企业合作中“挤入”路径的启发式框架，学术价值明确但偏理论、缺乏中国本土数据，公共传播价值有限。",[79],{"name":68,"url":66},[20,81,82,83],"农业经营主体","包容性农业","负责任规模化",[],{"status":86,"locked":13,"version":24,"method":25,"evidence":87},"unclassified",{"candidates":88,"agricultural_evidence":98,"reason":99},[89,94],{"code":90,"score":30,"supported":13,"title":91,"abstract":92,"tags":93},"G2",[],[],[81],{"code":29,"score":30,"supported":13,"title":95,"abstract":96,"tags":97},[],[],[20],true,"缺少足够的主题证据",[101,102],"农业经营主体 负责任规模化 农业价值链 包容性农业","农业经营主体 负责任规模化","农业经营主体负责任规模化农业价值链包容性农业-3755","10.1016\u002Fj.agsy.2026.104978",{"doi":104,"openalex_id":106,"authors":107,"venue":68,"cited_by_count":14,"oa_url":66,"card":8,"direction":8,"ingested_from":58},"W7214643574",[108,111],{"name":109,"orcid":110},"Marijn Faling","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0002-8104-2602",{"name":112,"orcid":8},"Sietze Vellema","2026-09-29T23:30:04.532391Z",{"id":115,"title":116,"url":117,"summary":118,"summary_zh":119,"content":8,"source_name":9,"source_url":117,"published_at":120,"category":11,"cover_url":8,"hotness":12,"is_selected":13,"score":121,"score_detail":122,"sources":126,"tags":128,"primary_topic":133,"secondary_topics":139,"classification":140,"search_phrases":164,"slug":167,"view_count":145,"doi":168,"paper":169,"created_at":188},2763,"How do productive service inputs enhance a country’s position in the global agricultural value chain?","https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3389\u002Ffsufs.2026.1887232","Introduction The ongoing restructuring of global agricultural value chains has reshaped the pattern of international agricultural competition. Optimizing countries’ positional structure within production networks and improving domestic value added capture capacity have emerged as central issues for advancing highquality agricultural development across economies. As modern productive services gradually penetrate agricultural production systems, they have evolved into critical endogenous drivers for optimizing agricultural factor allocation and promoting value chain upgrading. Methods Based on panel data of 55 economies from 2001 to 2020, this study employs fixed-effects models, mediation models, and moderation models to systematically explore how productive service inputs affect a country’s positions in the global agricultural value chain and clarify the underlying influencing mechanisms. Results The empirical results show that productive service input significantly improves a country’s agricultural GVC status. Mechanism tests confirm that productive services empower GVC upgrading through two core pathways: improving agricultural labor productivity and facilitating technological innovation. Meanwhile, the promotional effect is positively strengthened by increasing technical complexity in agricultural exports and human capital accumulation. Further heterogeneity analysis verifies evident differences in the empowerment effect across economic development levels, time periods, and GVC participation patterns. Discussion This study concludes that accelerating high quality productive service inputs and matching them with advanced human capital and export technology endowments provides a vital feasible path for countries to enhance their competitive advantages and achieve highvalue upgrading in global agricultural value chains.","引言 全球农业价值链的持续重构重塑了国际农业竞争格局。优化各国在生产网络中的位置结构、提升国内附加值捕获能力，已成为推动各经济体农业高质量发展的核心议题。随着现代生产性服务逐步渗透农业生产体系，其已演变为优化农业要素配置、促进价值链升级的关键内生驱动力。方法 本研究基于2001年至2020年55个经济体的面板数据，采用固定效应模型、中介模型和调节模型，系统探讨生产性服务投入如何影响一国在全球农业价值链中的位置，并阐明其潜在影响机制。结果 实证结果表明，生产性服务投入显著提升了一国的农业全球价值链地位。机制检验证实，生产性服务通过两条核心路径赋能价值链升级：提升农业劳动生产率与促进技术创新。同时，农业出口技术复杂度和人力资本积累的提高正向强化了这一促进效应。进一步的异质性分析验证了赋能效应在经济发展水平、时间段和全球价值链参与模式上存在明显差异。讨论 本研究认为，加快高质量生产性服务投入，并使其与先进人力资本和出口技术禀赋相匹配，为各国增强竞争优势、实现全球农业价值链高价值升级提供了重要的可行路径。","2026-09-16T00:00:00Z",79,{"impact":123,"substance":124,"depth":123,"authority":75,"freshness":72,"relevant":30,"comment":125},18,22,"基于55个经济体20年面板数据的实证研究，揭示生产性服务投入通过提升劳动生产率与技术创新推动农业全球价值链升级，结论对农业高质量发展有参考价值。",[127],{"name":9,"url":117},[129,130,20,131,132],"农业科技创新","农产品出口","农业生产性服务","农业人力资本",{"code":134,"slug":135,"name":136,"path":137,"parent_code":138},"J3","global-agriculture","国际合作与全球农业","\u002Ftopic\u002Fpolicy\u002Fglobal-agriculture","J",[],{"status":141,"locked":13,"version":24,"method":25,"evidence":142},"classified",{"candidates":143,"agricultural_evidence":98},[144,150,155,159],{"code":134,"score":145,"supported":98,"title":146,"abstract":147,"tags":149},3,[],[148],"全球农业",[],{"code":151,"score":30,"supported":13,"title":152,"abstract":153,"tags":154},"E5",[],[],[130],{"code":29,"score":30,"supported":13,"title":156,"abstract":157,"tags":158},[],[],[20],{"code":160,"score":30,"supported":13,"title":161,"abstract":162,"tags":163},"J2",[],[],[129],[165,166],"农业生产性服务 农业人力资本 农业科技创新 农业价值链","农业生产性服务 农业人力资本","农业生产性服务农业人力资本农业科技创新农业价值链-2763","10.3389\u002Ffsufs.2026.1887232",{"doi":168,"openalex_id":170,"authors":171,"venue":9,"cited_by_count":14,"oa_url":181,"card":182,"direction":186,"ingested_from":58},"W7213434328",[172,174,176,178],{"name":173,"orcid":8},"Longling Li",{"name":175,"orcid":8},"Xin Bai",{"name":177,"orcid":8},"Yuhan Ren",{"name":179,"orcid":180},"Qiang Jin","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0009-0005-1581-1759","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.frontiersin.org\u002Fjournals\u002Fsustainable-food-systems\u002Farticles\u002F10.3389\u002Ffsufs.2026.1887232\u002Fpdf",{"tldr":183,"method":184,"finding":185,"direction":186,"opportunity":187},"基于55个经济体面板数据，检验生产性服务投入如何提升一国全球农业价值链地位。","2001-2020年55经济体面板数据，固定效应、中介与调节模型。","生产性服务投入通过提升农业劳动生产率和促进技术创新显著提升农业GVC地位。","数字乡村与农业信息化","可探究数字农业服务投入对GVC地位的异质性影响，及与发展中国家数字基础设施的匹配机制。","2026-09-17T23:30:08.429911Z"]