skip to main content
10.1145/3468013.3468336acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesapcoriseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

The Linkages Between Social Protection Program and Environmental Impacts in Food Systems: A Conceptual Model

Published:27 November 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

∗The world is facing greater challenges in eradicating hunger, food insecurity, and all forms of malnutrition. Political conflict, economic slowdown, climate changes, and a pandemic are apparently becoming threats to progress. As one of the externalities of a food system, public policy like social protection programs, encompassed a range of regulations and programs used for problem-solving and holds a determinant role in the long term application of food systems. However, the food system is a complex web of activities that involve all fundamental aspects of social, environmental, and economic to achieve the state of the equilibrium system. The negative outcomes towards the environment are unavoidable since 26% of global emissions is coming from food production, processing, and distribution. The impact assessment of social protection policies towards the environment remains limited. This paper investigates the environmental impacts of three social protection programs: cash transfer, food subsidy, and in-kind transfer; using a system dynamics approach. The conceptual model provides a deep-structural insight and understanding of the ideas on how social protection programs in the food and agricultural system strongly influence the outturn of the environmental impacts. The developed model has shown the interlinkages of household expenditure increment, which influences by income level and social protection access that caused more dynamics and uncertain behavior in food consumption level. This considered as more impactful for environment sustainability since it will cause more production and distribution activities which drawn more greenhouse gas and food loss. Three external factors are determined as the control variables: price settings policy, import policy, and the amount of regional supply.

References

  1. Global Nutrition Report, “2018 Global Nutrition Report,” 2018. [Online]. Available: https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/2018-global-nutrition-report-reveals-malnutrition-unacceptably-high-and-affects.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. H. Ritchie and M. Roser, “Environmental Impacts of Food Production,” Our World in Data, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://ourworldindata.org/environmental-impacts-of-food#citation. [Accessed: 02-Feb-2020].Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. J. Poore and T. Nemecek, “Reducing food's environmental impacts through producers and consumers,” Science (80-. )., vol. 360, no. 6392, pp. 987–992, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. M. Musawa, “Studi implementasi program beras miskin (raskin) di wilayah kelurahan gajahmungkur, kecamatan gajahmungkur, kota semarang.,” pp. 1–159, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. M. Belanawane S., Kelembagaan Penyediaan Dan Penyaluran Komoditas Bantuan Pangan Non-Tunai (BPNT). 2020.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. M. I. Gómez, E. Meemken, and L. J. Verteramo Chiu, Agricultural value chains and social and environmental impacts: trends, challenges, and policy options. 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. R. A. Bahn, R. Nisr, and S. El Labban, “Food Policy in Lebanon,” Elsevier Ref. Modul. Food Sci., 2018.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. F. Kabuta, “Food Policy in Japan,” Elsevier Ref. Modul. Food Sci., 2017.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. S. Kay, E. Mattheisen, N. McKeon, P. De Meo, and A. Moragues Faus, “Public Policies for Food Sovereignty,” Public Policies Food Sovereignty, no. 1, pp. 1–12, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. S. Devereux and R. Sabates-Wheeler, “Transformative social protection,” no. October, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. P. J. Ericksen, “Conceptualizing food systems for global environmental change research,” Glob. Environ. Chang., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 234–245, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. R. Lillywhite, “Footprinting methods for assessment of the environmental impacts of food production and processing,” Environ. Assess. Manag. Food Ind., pp. 255–271, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. A. Malak-Rawlikowska , “Measuring the economic, environmental, and social sustainability of short food supply chains,” Sustain., vol. 11, no. 15, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. T. Sinkko, C. Caldeira, S. Corrado, and S. Sala, “Food consumption and wasted food,” Sav. Food, pp. 315–346, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. W. Steffen , “Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet,” Science (80-. )., vol. 347, no. 6223, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. M. Springmann, M. Clark, and D. Mason-D'Croz, “Options for keeping the food system within environmental limits,” Nature, vol. 562, pp. 519–525, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. E. Pruyt, Small System dynamics models for big issues: Triple jump towards real-world complexity. 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. A. O. Moeis, F. Desriani, A. R. Destyanto, T. Y. Zagloel, A. Hidayatno, and A. Sutrisno, “Sustainability assessment of the tanjung priok port cluster,” Int. J. Technol., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 353–363, 2020.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. B. Enserink, L. Hermans, P. Bots, J. Koppenjan, J. Kwakkel, and W. Thissen, “Systems Analysis,” in Policy Analysis of Multi-Actor Systems, Eleven International Publishing, 2010, pp. 51–77.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. W. E. Walker, “Policy analysis: a systematic approach to supporting policymaking in the public sector,” Multicriteria Decis. Anal., vol. 9, no. 11, 2000.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. S. N. Grösser, A. Reyes-Lecuona, and G. Granholm, “Dynamics of long-life assets: From technology adaptation to upgrading the business model,” Dyn. Long-Life Assets From Technol. Adapt. to Upgrad. Bus. Model, pp. 1–356, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. W. A. H. Thissen and W. E. Walker, Public Policy Analysis New Developments. New York: Springer Science+Business Media, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. T. N. Zahari, “Analisis Kebijakan Pembiayaan Berkelanjutan untuk Jaminan Kesehatan Semesta di Indonesia: Studi Kasus Cukai Rokok,” 2019.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. P. Enserink, B., Hermans, L., Kwakkel, J., Thissen, W., Koppenjan, J., & Bots, “Actor Analysis,” in Policy Analysis of Multi-Actor Systems, 2010, pp. 79–108.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Republik Indonesia, UNDANG-UNDANG REPUBLIK INDONESIA NOMOR 16 TAHUN 2016 TENTANG PENGESAHAN PARIS AGREEMENT TO THE UNITED NATIONS FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE (PERSETUJUAN PARIS ATAS KONVENSI KERANGKA KERJA PERSERIKATAN BANGSA-BANGSA MENGENAI PERUBAHAN IKLIM). Indonesia, 2016, p. 71.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Sekretariat Kabinet Republik Indonesia, “Rapat Terbatas mengenai Kelanjutan Kerja Sama Penurunan Emisi Gas Rumah Kaca (GRK) Indonesia – Norwegia dan Kebijakan Instrumen Nilai Ekonomi Karbon (Carbon Pricing), 6 Juli 2020, di Istana Merdeka, Provinsi DKI Jakarta,” 2020. [Online]. Available: https://setkab.go.id/rapat-terbatas-mengenai-kelanjutan-kerja-sama-penurunan-emisi-gas-rumah-kaca-grk-indonesia-norwegia-dan-kebijakan-instrumen-nilai-ekonomi-karbon-carbon-pricing-6-juli-2020-di-istana/. [Accessed: 18-Feb-2021].Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Badan Ketahanan Pangan Kementerian Pertanian, “Pusat Distribusi dan Cadangan Pangan.” [Online]. Available: http://bkp.pertanian.go.id/pusat-distribusi-dan-cadangan-pangan. [Accessed: 18-Feb-2021].Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. H. Amaliyah, “Analisis hubungan proporsi pengeluaran dan konsumsi pangan dengan ketahanan pangan rumah tangga petani padi di kabupaten Klaten,” Universitas Sebelas Maret, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    APCORISE '21: Proceedings of the 4th Asia Pacific Conference on Research in Industrial and Systems Engineering
    May 2021
    672 pages
    ISBN:9781450390385
    DOI:10.1145/3468013

    Copyright © 2021 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 27 November 2022

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate68of110submissions,62%
  • Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)17
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

    Other Metrics

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format