3.2 Methodology
Initially we conduct a secondary data analysis and policy analysis to understand the
drivers, production patterns and policies supporting industrial crop production in
different parts of SSA (Sect. 3.3.1). We extract agricultural production data from the
statistical database of the FAO (FAOSTAT 2019), and compare them with basic
food security indicators such as the “Depth of Food Deficit” and “Global Hunger
Index” for selected countries (FAOSTAT 2019; von Grebmer et al. 2018). We focus
on countries with different experiences and trajectories of industrial crop production,
namely Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi and Swaziland.
Subsequently, we conduct a systematic review to synthesize the evidence about
the impacts of industrial crop production on food security (Sect. 3.3.2). In particular,
we identify the mechanisms through which industrial crop production intersects with
food security, and the underlying processes mediating these mechanisms. As a
starting point, we use the common food security mechanisms identified in the
literature across the pillars of food availability, access, utilization and stability
(Wiggins et al. 2015; Jarzebski et al. 2019) (Table 3.1). We use various criteria
and variables to categorize the different studies and find patterns within the literature,
including study characteristics (e.g. author affiliation, crops, study scale), methods,
mechanisms and food security outcomes (Table 3.2). The food security outcomes are
categorized based on the presence of mechanisms and whether the mechanism has
the predicted effect on food security, the opposite effect or a bi-directional effect.
For the systematic review, we mainly focus on peer-reviewed literature
(i.e. journal papers, relevant book chapters), complementing it with limited relevant
grey literature. The search keywords were combinations of industrial crops and the
names of SSA countries that are the major producers of these crops as identified from
the database of the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations
(FAOSTAT 2019) (e.g. “cocoa” + “Ghana”, “coffee” + “Ethiopia”). The main
studied crops include cocoa, coffee, cotton, jatropha, rubber, sugarcane, shea, tea,
tobacco, oil palm and vanilla. We identify the reviewed literature though Elsevier
Scopus and Web of Science (for peer-reviewed studies), and Google Scholar (technical reports) (Gentles et al. 2016). Other relevant literature was also identified
through snowballing (e.g. through the references of reviewed studies). Literature
selection was performed in October 2017.
After locating the relevant documents, we screen the abstracts to establish their
relevance to the objective of the review (i.e. food security). If the document is
relevant, we proceed with the full review. If the abstract does not allow us to
conclusively determine relevance, we undertake a full review to avoiding missing
any relevant literature. Overall, we fully review 118 papers, of which 90 are peerreviewed studies, with the full list included in the four tables of Sect. 3.3.2.
86
M. P. Jarzebski et al.
Initially we conduct a secondary data analysis and policy analysis to understand the
drivers, production patterns and policies supporting industrial crop production in
different parts of SSA (Sect. 3.3.1). We extract agricultural production data from the
statistical database of the FAO (FAOSTAT 2019), and compare them with basic
food security indicators such as the “Depth of Food Deficit” and “Global Hunger
Index” for selected countries (FAOSTAT 2019; von Grebmer et al. 2018). We focus
on countries with different experiences and trajectories of industrial crop production,
namely Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi and Swaziland.
Subsequently, we conduct a systematic review to synthesize the evidence about
the impacts of industrial crop production on food security (Sect. 3.3.2). In particular,
we identify the mechanisms through which industrial crop production intersects with
food security, and the underlying processes mediating these mechanisms. As a
starting point, we use the common food security mechanisms identified in the
literature across the pillars of food availability, access, utilization and stability
(Wiggins et al. 2015; Jarzebski et al. 2019) (Table 3.1). We use various criteria
and variables to categorize the different studies and find patterns within the literature,
including study characteristics (e.g. author affiliation, crops, study scale), methods,
mechanisms and food security outcomes (Table 3.2). The food security outcomes are
categorized based on the presence of mechanisms and whether the mechanism has
the predicted effect on food security, the opposite effect or a bi-directional effect.
For the systematic review, we mainly focus on peer-reviewed literature
(i.e. journal papers, relevant book chapters), complementing it with limited relevant
grey literature. The search keywords were combinations of industrial crops and the
names of SSA countries that are the major producers of these crops as identified from
the database of the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations
(FAOSTAT 2019) (e.g. “cocoa” + “Ghana”, “coffee” + “Ethiopia”). The main
studied crops include cocoa, coffee, cotton, jatropha, rubber, sugarcane, shea, tea,
tobacco, oil palm and vanilla. We identify the reviewed literature though Elsevier
Scopus and Web of Science (for peer-reviewed studies), and Google Scholar (technical reports) (Gentles et al. 2016). Other relevant literature was also identified
through snowballing (e.g. through the references of reviewed studies). Literature
selection was performed in October 2017.
After locating the relevant documents, we screen the abstracts to establish their
relevance to the objective of the review (i.e. food security). If the document is
relevant, we proceed with the full review. If the abstract does not allow us to
conclusively determine relevance, we undertake a full review to avoiding missing
any relevant literature. Overall, we fully review 118 papers, of which 90 are peerreviewed studies, with the full list included in the four tables of Sect. 3.3.2.
86
M. P. Jarzebski et al.