This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons. org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Vilnius Gediminas Technical University Business, Management and Economics Engineering ISSN: 2669-2481 / eISSN: 2669-249X 2022 Volume 20 Issue 2: 207–223 https://doi.org/10.3846/bmee.2022.17101 *Corresponding author. E-mail: mangirdas.morkunas@evaf.vu.lt CAN CLIMATE-SMART AGRICULTURE HELP TO ASSURE FOOD SECURITY THROUGH SHORT SUPPLY CHAINS? A SYSTEMATIC BIBLIOMETRIC AND BIBLIOGRAPHIC LITERATURE REVIEW Mangirdas MORKŪNAS 1*, Elzė RUDIENĖ 2, Aleksander OSTENDA3 1Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Vilnius University, Lithuania 2Business School, Vilnius University, Lithuania 3University of Technology, Katowice, Poland Received 06 June 2022; accepted 04 July 2022 Abstract. Purpose – This paper aims to reveal potential research possibilities for enhancing climate- smart agriculture through short supply chains. Research question – How can short supply chains assure food security and the promotion of climate- smart agriculture? Research methodology – Bibliographic and bibliometric coupling techniques were employed using data from 1990–2022. The raw data was processed using the VOSviewer 1.6.18 software version. Findings – The results confirm the positive effect of the systemically important relationship between the short supply chain and food security. Research limitations – Climate-smart agriculture is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon. Ad- ditional variables may have moderating and mediating effects on the impact of short supply chains on food security. Practical implications – The results establish the importance of having a short supply chain for food security in different aspects of the process from the harvest to the table. Originality and value – This study confirms the rationale for developing shorter food supply chains to assure food security and climate-smart agriculture when possible. Keywords: climate-smart agriculture, food security, short supply chain, bibliographic analysis, VOSviewer. JEL Classification: Q18, Q19. Introduction The coronavirus pandemic, which began in 2019, and the 2022 war in Ukraine are the main causes of disruption to the food distribution network (Benedek et  al., 2021; Barrett, 2020). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5575-2213 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9326-5379 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9326-5379%202 208 M. Morkūnas et al. Can climate-smart agriculture help to assure food security through short supply... Sustainability and the food supply chain (from production to consumption) are the key chal- lenges in terms of food loss and waste (FAO et al., 2021; Stanciu et al., 2022). One option for solving this problem is reflected in a growing trend towards a diet based on local products (Constantin et al., 2021). The traditional structure of the supply chain has several limitations within the process (Mirabelli & Solina, 2019). The number of actors in a long supply chain depends on the complexity of the product’s production and the ability of one manufacturer to carry out all possible work to enable the product to be used by the end customer (Molnár et  al., 2010). Short food supply chains (SFSCs) are recognised as innovative options with the potential to control prices and be independent of other parties (Ilbery & Maye, 2005; Aleksiev & Petrova, 2021). Having a short food supply chain also benefits the producer, who can create a larger one for added value, and the consumer, who receives healthier food from a shorter distance. Supply chain risk can lead to internal and external disturbances (Li et al., 2018; Rauschmayer et al., 2015) regarding sustainability, food security and food waste. Sus- tainable supply chain management (SSCM) is important not only for the optimisation of the process but also for food security (Tuomala & Grant, 2021). Supply chains can be categorised by different characteristics (e.g., type of product, market demand), which are usually related to food security (Castro & Jaimes, 2017). 1. A brief literature review on the nexus between food security and the short supply chain Problems concerning food waste were identified in the 1980s by the Food and Agriculture Organization [FAO] and centred on food security and the fight against hunger. As Tuomala and Grant (2021) have identified, security and access to food are dimensions directly related to sustainable development and, thus, to the topics of food security and food waste. The inef- ficiency of the food supply chain is characterised by two aspects: first, it is a disruption (e.g., pandemic, war) and a dynamic environment, and second, it is the length of the supply chain and the need to compromise between sustainability and economic functioning (Vojtovic et al., 2016; Torero, 2020). Because the full cycle (from the farm to the table) is compressed to meet deadlines and maintain production efficiency, supply chain design must rely on lo- gistics and warehousing functions (Gružauskas et al., 2018; Xue et al., 2017; Diaz-Ruiz et al., 2018; Krishna Bahadur et al., 2016) as the main aspects for preventing food loss. Magalhães et al. (2019) have identified 15 main causes of food loss, including lack of infrastructure and technical management, inefficient storage management, lack of coordination and exchange of information, lack of pricing strategies and advertising management, overproduction and inadequate demand forecasting (Magalhães et al., 2019). Disruptions of transport traffic can also play an important role in reducing the supply chain system efficiency (Castro & Jaimes, 2017). Diaz-Ruiz et al. (2018) categorise the reasons that lead to food security, loss and waste at three different levels: (a) micro-level causes (e.g., packaging); (b) meso-level causes (e.g., infrastructure); and (c) macro-level causes (e.g., purchasing options). Inefficiencies in the food supply chain, leading to food security problems, loss and the generation of waste take place across all of these stages (Hartikainen et al., 2018; Raak et al., 2017). The Covid-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on the food security and food sup- ply chain, adding to the rapid increase of food insecurity compared to the pre-Covid-19 Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 2022, 20(2): 207–223 209 period. Pandemics impact food security and cause disruption to the GFSC (global food security supply chain) as well (Alabi & Ngwenyama, 2022). The food supply chain is influenced by multiple different parties, such as politicians, re- tailers, society and manufacturers, and farmers/growers (Mithun Ali et al., 2019). The FAO et al. (2013) has identified the need to focus on food loss and waste generation in the initial stages of the food supply chain from the farm/growing area to the distribution stage. In the European context, there are two types of food supply chains: local food systems (LFS) and short supply chains (SFSC) (Floris & Schwarcz, 2018). From a global perspective, the food supply chain usually includes the stages of farm, processing, wholesale, retail and consumer. Many different elements comprise these stages, and each element can influence food loss and waste (Chauhan et  al., 2021). A short supply chain has fewer negative impacts (Aleksiev & Petrova, 2021) on food security because of the distance between production and consump- tion. The quality of the food is mainly reflected in the losses, as it is important to measure food security. It is affected by several feedback loops: two cycles of positive feedback cycles or reinforcement. One of the aspects of the short supply chain is the “local food system”, in which the production, processing, marketing and consumption of food takes place in a limited geographic area (Todorova, 2020). The main positive aspect of food supply chains is the number of intermediaries (in principle, using the minimum number is preferable). The ideal is to have direct contact between the producer and the consumer. There are differ- ent groups of possible systems, including “community-supported agriculture” and “member states” (Todorova, 2020), and the main issues include direct communication (consumer–pro- ducer) and transportation (e.g., farm shops, pick-your-own). Jarzebowski et  al. (2020) classify factors into three groups: (1) creation of short food supply chains (product know-how, innovations, regulatory frameworks and government policies); (2) product development in the short food supply chain (efficient application of technology, investment of time and money, collective branding); and (3) access to market (online sales, sales to local communities) (Hoang, 2021). Sellitto et  al. (2018) have identified nine factors present in the short food supply chain: environmental friendliness of operations; specificity of territorial brands; direct and ethical relationships between producers and consumers; organic production; food safety and trace- ability; cultural heritage; consumers’ health; origin identification of products; and local work and cooperation. Researchers have found that the supply chain evaluated by the structure has different problems with food security (Castro & Jaimes, 2017). The lack of investment in the agricul- ture sector is identified as a major barrier to ensuring food security (Kaur, 2021). This find- ing stresses the importance of the first – economic dimension of climate-smart agriculture. The main factors influencing food security, loss and waste in the food supply chain in the context of climate-smart agriculture Beausang et  al. (2017) identify pre-harvest conditions and actions in the field that can lead to subsequent losses in the food supply chain due to differences in the quality at harvest; specifically, contracts may undersupply quantities more than necessary, and promotions by retailers can manage waste. Janousek et  al. (2018) indicate that food producers, retailers and consumers experience financial losses associated with food waste stemming from direct about:blank 210 M. Morkūnas et al. Can climate-smart agriculture help to assure food security through short supply... losses, sales losses and the cost of waste management (Buzby & Hyman, 2012; Gunders, 2012; Hickey & Ozbay, 2014). Peira et al. (2018) analyse the management of unsold products and how operators act in such situations. All of these aspects could be identified as stakehold- ers’ attitudes and their importance for food loss and waste, as well as food security in the food supply process. The second important factor is poor management of spoilable foods. Zhu (2017) states that a dynamic pricing policy supported by a traceability system could significantly reduce food waste and improve retailers’ performance. Rijpkema et  al. (2014) confirmed that the management of the retailer can effectively supply products of appropriate quality with acceptable levels of product waste and security. Product specifications are an important tool in supply chains for managing the quality levels of products offered to (end) customers (de Hooge et al., 2018). This fact confirms and adds additional aspects according to Devin and Richards (2018), who emphasise strict privacy standards as a key to food waste issues in the fresh food supply chains of industrialised countries. Buyer–supplier contracts and agreements that enforce strong conditions for deliveries and unsold products are con- sidered to potentially lead to waste, as food chain operators with greater bargaining power have a “tendency” to shift the risk and costs of unsold products to weaker operators through free returns of last-minute cancellations (Mena et al., 2011; Devin & Richards, 2018). Supply chain interruptions could be identified as several different elements, but Teller et al. (2018) related them to retail operations such as in-store logistics, out-of-stock prevention and the occurrence of waste in the store. In general, Teller et al. (2018) opine that logistics and mar- keting aspects with not such big idea for food loss and waste prevention. Shelf space in the store is very important when considering food loss and waste (Yang et al., 2017; Grzybowska et al., 2014). Research by Goossens et al. (2019) has proved that secondary packaging in food loss, waste and food security aspects are very important and in some cases can create losses in the distribution stage, although customers can waste food as well. From another point of view, Wohner et al. (2020) note that packaging itself is a problem due to shape, composition, and other factors. The problem regarding quality standards may be invisible because signifi- cant amounts of goods are left in the field and will never be transported to the consumer (Gillman et al., 2019). Even food products that do reach retailers can be stopped because of quality and cannot be redistributed (Hermsdorf et al., 2017). Edible products can be removed from the commercial food supply chain, being rejected as outtrades deemed cosmetically defective due to market-based decisions (McKenzie et al., 2017). In general, a short food supply chain is more environmentally friendly and results in less loss and waste, but it is not always a feasible alternative. 2. Methodology Various bibliographic coupling techniques are proposed as a research tool to achieve a sys- tematic review of the literature (Habib & Afzal, 2019; Morkunas & Balezentis, 2021; Maseda et  al., 2022). Bibliographic coupling is a particularly useful research technique when investi- gating interdisciplinary (Thurner et  al., 2020) or newly derived concepts (Shah et  al., 2019). Our research satisfies both of these criteria, as food security is being researched in a variety of disciplines, including economics (Tweeten, 1999; De Haen & Hemrich, 2007; Stevano et al., Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 2022, 20(2): 207–223 211 2020), environmental science (Workie et al., 2020), agricultural and plant science (Reddy, 2015; Opitz et al., 2016; Ulian et al., 2020), sociology (Carolan, 2016; Bhandari, 2017) and manage- ment (McLaughlin & Kinzelbach, 2015; Abdelkader & Elshorbagy, 2021). Short supply chains appear in fields such as logistics-related research (Paciarotti & Torregiani, 2021), agricultural research (De Fazio, 2016), economics (Kiss et  al., 2019) and sustainability science (Kamble et al., 2020). Thus, our research concepts are of a truly interdisciplinary nature. The novelty of our research is confirmed by the information provided in Figure 1, which shows that research on short supply chains under the food security concept has gained momentum only after 2018. Numerous studies aimed at systematic literature reviews employing various bibliographic coupling procedures (Yu et al., 2020; Abdullah & Naved Khan, 2021; Morkunas et al., 2022) suggest a procedure that determines explicit inclusion and exclusion criteria. These criteria are illustrated in Table 1. Table 1. Inclusion and exclusion criteria for research Inclusion criteria Exclusion criteria paper included short supply chain and food security subjects among its keywords paper focused on other research domains paper is in English paper is in other than English language paper is longer than 6,800 characters paper is shorter than 6,800 characters paper has been peer reviewed paper has not undergone a peer review procedure Multiple rationales motivated the selection of the inclusion criteria noted in Table 1. For one, we are investigating the development of science in short supply chains under the food security domain. We are not fluent in any other scientific language except English. In addi- tion, English is the primary scientific language in the world (Ferguson et al., 2011). Moreover, typical scientific papers are at least four pages long (Morkunas & Balezentis, 2021), which typically equates to more than 6,800 characters (excluding spaces). Lastly, although we do not question the scientific integrity of the Clarivate DB, which we used as a source for our research, and its rigorous peer review procedures, some of the papers in Clarivate DB are not peer reviewed. For example, some editorial addresses or letters are not appropriate subjects for a peer review procedure. Thus, we excluded such documents from our research. Our research was carried out on 5 May 2022. The keywords used were “food security AND short supply chain”. The research sources were articles published in outlets included in the Clarivate Analytics Master Journal List. The time span was 1990–2022. The raw data was processed using VOSviewer 1.6.18 software version. 3. Results 3.1. Bibliometric analysis Our research produced 134 publications that satisfied the predetermined inclusion criteria. The first publication appeared in 1999, indicating that research on short supply chains in the context of assuring food security represents quite a recent topic. However, as Figure 1 212 M. Morkūnas et al. Can climate-smart agriculture help to assure food security through short supply... shows, specific research in the area of food security and short supply chains only gained momentum in 2018, confirming the relevance of the current study in analysing trends in a recently emerging research area. –5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Figure 1. Number of publications in food security and short supply chain area, 1990–2022 When analysing the specific journals that have been most engaged in the area of short supply chains and food security, we identified one polarising centre for the dissemination of scientific knowledge in the area: Sustainability (ISSN 2071-1050), which has published more than 10% of all scientific papers in the field. The remaining scientific outlets have not pro- duced more than 2–3% of all published materials and do not appear to exercise a significant influence on the development of knowledge in the food security and short supply chain area (see Table 2). Table 2. Scientific outlets most engaged in the dissemination of knowledge in the food security and short supply chain area, 1990–2022 Journal Number of publications related to food security and short supply chains SUSTAINABILITY 14 GLOBAL FOOD SECURITY –AGRICULTURE POLICY ECONOMICS AND ENVIRONMENT 4 ACTA HORTICULTURAE 3 AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS 3 Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 2022, 20(2): 207–223 213 Journal Number of publications related to food security and short supply chains AGRONOMY (BASEL) 3 FOOD AND ENERGY SECURITY 3 SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT 3 BRITISH FOOD JOURNAL 2 CHINA AGRICULTURAL ECONOMIC REVIEW 2 FRONTIERS IN SUSTAINABLE FOOD SYSTEMS 2 IOP CONFERENCE SERIES: EARTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE 2 JOURNAL OF AGRIBUSINESS IN DEVELOPING AND EMERGING ECONOMIES 2 LAND 2 NATO SCIENCE FOR PEACE AND SECURITY SERIES C: ENVIRONMENTAL SECURITY 2 A comparative analysis of countries and geographic entities which are the most involved in research on short supply chains in the context of food security was not as easily ascer- tained as the analysis of scientific publications (Table 2). The leading country is the United States, closely followed by the United Kingdom. Other countries heavily involved in this area of research include Italy, Australia and India. Notably, the 13 countries listed in Table 3 account for 100% of the research in the area (134 out of 134). Table 3. Countries and geographic entities most engaged in the dissemination of knowledge regarding food security and short supply chains, 1990–2022 Country Number of publications USA 31 UK 21 Italy 13 Australia 10 India 9 PRC 8 Spain 8 Canada 7 Kenya 6 Netherlands 6 Brazil 5 France 5 Romania 5 End of Table 2 214 M. Morkūnas et al. Can climate-smart agriculture help to assure food security through short supply... 3.2. Bibliographic coupling analysis In total, five clusters with 130 links and a total link strength of 216 were identified during the bibliographic coupling procedure. Figure 2. Bibliographic coupling of research in the food security and short supply chain area, 1990–2022 We start our analysis with a violet cluster (please see Figure 2) which has 15 links and a total link strength of 34. Although some may find the study by Gregory et  al. (2005) to be the polarising element within the network, the largest number of links (thus, the stron- gest networking influence) is displayed by the Rivera-Ferre et al. (2021) study on the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic on food security. Similar tendencies are being displayed by the blue cluster, where the network polarising study is considered to be Garnett’s study on food sustainability (2013), although the Nchanji and Lutomia (2021) research covers the broad- est scope in the science, with nine links and total link strength of 11. Once again, the study about the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic on the resilience of food systems appears to be the most influential. The green cluster seems more balanced than the previous ones. It has two focal items authored by Smith et al. (2016) and Borsellino et al. (2020), the latter being the most influential with 17 links and a total link strength of 37. The red cluster also displays a balanced character with quite equal weights of network items and dense links within the network. The leading, although not dominating, item is Xu’s et al. (2021) research about the compound effects of the Covid-19 pandemic on food security and food supply chains. The smallest cluster (here, the yellow one) displays not only the lowest number of items within the network but also the least density and importance to the development of the science. The loose bounds and small weight of the network items indicate that they are only loosely connected. The most important item within the network is Barbosa’s (2021) bibliometric study about the management of the agri-food supply chain. It displays a total link strength of 11, achieved by 11 links. This correspondence between total link strength and number of links indicates that this study does not have explicitly expressed relationships with any of the other scientific publications. The density map (Figure 3) illustrates that there are no overlying heat areas, so the re- search in this area is quite fragmented, not allowing identification of the main research streams. Two studies, namely Gregory et al. (2005) and Garnett (2013), dominate the scien- tific landscape in the area. Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 2022, 20(2): 207–223 215 Figure 3. Density map of bibliographic coupling of research in the food security and short supply chain area, 1990–2022 Generalising this part of the research, it appears that from a scientific perspective, food security and short supply chains started being more intensively researched together only after the Covid-19 pandemic outbreak. It may be a shortcoming, as Ilbery and Maye (2005) have previously demonstrated, that short supply chains were not identified earlier as a solution to food security problems. And if researched earlier, they may have helped to feed a substantial portion of the world population much earlier. 3.3. Citation analysis The citation analysis (Figure 4) also revealed five main clusters in the area. The corresponding number of clusters obtained during bibliographic coupling and co-citation analysis confirms the robustness of the research results. All five clusters contain 120 items with 1,393 links and a total link strength of 1,594. Figure 4. Citation analysis of research in the food security and short supply chain area, 1990–2022 The dense red cluster is centred around Hobbs’ (2020) research, with 38 links and a total link strength of 53. Analysing network-to-network dependency, we found moderate relation- ships with blue and green clusters and only weak interdependences with violet and yellow clusters, indicating the distinctiveness of the red cluster research, which is generally based on the Covid-19 effects on food supply chains and networks. The green cluster is based on 216 M. Morkūnas et al. Can climate-smart agriculture help to assure food security through short supply... more conceptual research focusing on the food supply industry in general and its influence on the various forms of rural development. The leading article is the Marsden et al. (2020) study on the impact of various forms of food supply chains on the development of rural regions. This study has 39 links and a total link strength of 43. The most influential is Renting’s et al. (2003) research aimed at disclosing the positive effects short food supply chains have on rural develop- ment. The blue cluster is focused on various issues related to food security and the possible role of short supply chains in it. It is being dominated by the Godfray et al. (2010) conceptual study aimed at raising discussion about the drawbacks that the world must accept in a quest to feed a population that is approaching 9 billion people. Its total link strength is 41, achieved by 36 links. The yellow cluster can be viewed as a methodological one. This cluster is dominated by research investigating various new approaches for supply selection in food supply chains, risk measurement methods and similar topics. The leading study is Forman and Penivati (1998), which examined adjustments to the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) individual judgement scales. The least important is the violet cluster, which has the fewest number of items, and the relationship between network participants is the weakest. The most important study is Lioutas and Charatsari’s (2020) investigation of the possibility of integrating short supply chains into the smart farming concept. Its total link strength is 20, with 20 links. This research is also related to three of the four remaining clusters (blue, red and green). Figure 5. Density map of citation analysis of research in the food security and short supply chain area, 1990–2022 The density analysis (Figure 5) clearly indicates the extreme proximity of the red cluster research – the studies aimed at investigating possible solutions to food security problems that are offered by short supply chains in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic. The distinctiveness of the research comprising the role of the short supply chain in the evolution of rural areas can also be observed. In view of these findings, we can conclude that based on co-citation analysis, we re- vealed the following scientific trends: short supply chains are seen as one of the factors for rural development, and another emerging research direction is to consider a short supply chain as a possible response to food shortages that have been intensified by the Covid-19 pandemic. Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 2022, 20(2): 207–223 217 3.4. Keywords analysis The keywords analysis (Figure 6) provided 21 clusters with 290 items, which are bonded by 2,059 links, with a total link strength of 2,125. Figure 6. Keywords analysis of research in the food security and short supply chain area, 1990–2022 The overwhelming majority of network influence is executed by the food security con- cept, displaying a total link strength of 243, with 204 and 28 occurrences which (together with concepts of food supply chains and delivery technologies) comprise the violet cluster. The brown cluster is focused on the Covid-19 pandemic and its influence on malnutrition, food supply and agri-food supply chains (particularly in Africa). It has 69 links, with a total link strength of 78 and 10 occurrences. Three different clusters (blue, light blue and purple) are focused on various aspects of climate change. In all of this research, short supply chains are considered one of the focal actors in mitigating climate change. The blue cluster is more oriented toward micro-level agricultural interventions helping to facilitate local food produc- tion and short supply chains. The focal keyword is “greenhouse gas emissions”, with 21 links and a total link strength of 21 in three occurrences. Light blue is more oriented towards macro-level actions and policy measures in supporting short supply chains as an approach to lowering the carbon footprint. The main keyword in this cluster is “climate change”, with 30 links, a total link strength of 34, and four occurrences. The purple cluster focuses on the resilience and vulnerability of food systems in light of climate change. The most frequent keyword here is “climate change”, with 39 links, a total link strength of 43, and four occur- rences. The light green cluster evaluates food security through the lens of alternative agri- food networks. The most influential keyword in this network is “security”, with a total link strength of 72 in 64 links and six occurrences. In sum, we can state that a significant part of the research on food security and short supply chains falls under a broader climate-change-mitigation umbrella. Another significant research direction is a response to the Covid-19 pandemic and resulting food security issues. A smaller yet significant research direction is aimed at solving food security challenges with the help of short supply chains in the least developed countries, in particular sub-Saharan Africa. 218 M. Morkūnas et al. Can climate-smart agriculture help to assure food security through short supply... Conclusions The short supply chain management in the context of climate-smart agriculture covers sev- eral unique aspects of sustainability, including food loss and food waste, but food security is the most important. All aspects are even more important because of unusual situations such as the pandemic (Covid) or war (in Ukraine). Accordingly, producers and farmers are taking increasing care regarding food security in supply chain management. The wider implementa- tion of short supply chains provides more leverage and bargaining power for farmers, thus improving their economic position. This action strengthens not only the economic but also the social dimension of climate-smart agriculture. Analysis of short supply chain management shows a clear solution for the food security (and food waste) issue in the context of climate-smart agriculture: its short supply chain management and local food system (where possible). Both solutions are related to having as short of a supply chain as possible between the producer/farmer and the consumer. The bibliometric analysis proves that the investigation of short supply chains in the con- text of food security is a new and promising research avenue. Current research is focused on a few directions, namely Covid-19-induced challenges to food security, environmental concerns and climate change mitigation policies, which represent the adaptation facet of the climate-smart agriculture concept. Due to the novelty of the idea, the research on short supply chains in the context of food security is highly polarised. All 100% of the publications were produced by 13 leading coun- tries in this particular research area. This situation requires urgent attention, as climate-smart agriculture initiatives as well as food shortage supply chains are context-sensitive; thus, the solutions offered must be tailored to local needs. The expansion of the research geography would allow solving food security problems in a greater number of struggling countries, especially in Africa and Southeast Asia, where food security remains a major issue (Chan et al., 2019). Acknowledgements This research has received funding from European Social Fund (project No 09.3.3-LMT- K-712-19-0086) under grant agreement with the Research Council of Lithuania (LMT LT). References Abdelkader, A., & Elshorbagy, A. (2021). ACPAR: A framework for linking national water and food security management with global conditions. Advances in Water Resources, 147, 103809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2020.103809 Abdullah, & Naved Khan, M. (2021). Determining mobile payment adoption: A systematic literature search and bibliometric analysis. Cogent Business & Management, 8(1), 1893245. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2021.1893245 Alabi, M. O., & Ngwenyama, O. (2022). Food security and disruptions of the global food supply chains during COVID-19: building smarter food supply chains for post COVID-19 era. British Food Jour- nal. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-03-2021-0333 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2020.103809 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2021.1893245 https://www.emerald.com/insight/search?q=Michael%20Omotayo%20Alabi https://www.emerald.com/insight/search?q=Ojelanki%20Ngwenyama https://www.emerald.com/insight/publication/issn/0007-070X https://www.emerald.com/insight/publication/issn/0007-070X https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-03-2021-0333 Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 2022, 20(2): 207–223 219 Aleksiev, G., & Petrova, N. (2021). Short food supply chains in Bulgaria – sustainability and disruptions. Trakia Journal of Sciences, 19(1), 187–191. https://doi.org/10.15547/tjs.2021.s.01.028 Barbosa, M. W. (2021). Uncovering research streams on agri-food supply chain management: A biblio- metric study. Global Food Security, 28, 100517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2021.100517 Barrett, C. B. (2020). Actions now can curb food systems fallout from COVID-19. Nature Food, 1, 319–320. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-020-0085-y Beausang, C., Hall, C., & Toma, L. (2017) Food waste and losses in primary production: Qualitative insights from horticulture. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 126, 177–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.07.042 Bhandari, A. (2017). Women’s status and global food security: An overview. Sociology Compass, 11(5), e12479. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12479 Benedek, Z., Ferto, I., Marreiros, C. G., De Aguiar, P. M., Pocol, C. B., Cechura, L., Poder, A., Paaso, P., & Bakucs, Z. (2021). Farm diversification as a potential success factor for small-scale farmers con- strained by COVID created lockdown. PLoS ONE, 16, e0251715. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251715 Borsellino, V., Schimmenti, E., & El Bilali, H. (2020). Agri-food markets towards sustainable pat- terns. Sustainability, 12(6), 2193. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062193 Buzby, J. C., & Hyman, J. (2012). Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States. Food Policy, 37(5), 561–570. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2012.06.002 Carolan, M. (2016). The sociology of food and agriculture. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315670935 Castro, O. A. J., & Jaimes, A. W. (2017). Dynamic impact of the structure of the supply chain of perishable foods on logistics performance and food security. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 10(4), 687–710. https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2147 Chan, C. Y., Tran, N., Pethiyagoda, S., Crissman, C. C., Sulser, T. B., & Phillips, M. J. (2019). Prospects and challenges of fish for food security in Africa. Global Food Security, 20, 17–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2018.12.002 Chauhan, C., Dhir, A., Akram, M. U., & Salo, J. (2021). Food loss and waste in food supply chains. A systematic literature review and framework development approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 295, 126438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126438 Constantin, M., Beia, S. I., Dinu, M., Pătărlăgeanu, S. R., Petrariu, R., & Deaconu, M. E. (2021). Eco- nomic implications of food consumption behavior changes in Romania during the Covid-19 pan- demic. Economic Engineering in Agriculture and Rural Development, 21(3), 287–292. De Fazio, M. (2016). Agriculture and sustainability of the welfare: The role of the short supply chain. Ag- riculture and Agricultural Science Procedia, 8, 461–466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aaspro.2016.02.044 De Haen, H., & Hemrich, G. (2007). The economics of natural disasters: Implications and challenges for food security. Agricultural Economics, 37, 31–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.2007.00233.x de Hooge, I. E., van Dulm, E., & van Trijp, H. C. M. (2018). Cosmetic specifications in the food waste issue: Supply chain considerations and practices concerning suboptimal food products. Journal of Cleaner Production, 183, 698–709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.132 Devin, B., & Richards, C. (2018). Food waste, power, and corporate social responsibility in the Austra- lian food supply chain. Journal of Business Ethics, 150, 199–210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3181-z Diaz-Ruiz, R., Costa-Font, M., López-i-Gelats, F., & Gil, J. (2018). A sum of incidentals or a structural problem? The true nature of food waste in the metropolitan region of Barcelona. Sustainability, 10, 3730. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103730 FAO, IFAD, & WFP. (2013). The state of food insecurity in the world 2013. The  multiple dimensions of food security. Rome. https://www.fao.org/3/i3434e/i3434e.pdf https://doi.org/10.15547/tjs.2021.s.01.028 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2021.100517 https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-020-0085-y https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344917302355 https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/resources-conservation-and-recycling https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/resources-conservation-and-recycling/vol/126/suppl/C https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.07.042 https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12479 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251715 https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062193 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2012.06.002 https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315670935 https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2147 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2018.12.002 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126438 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aaspro.2016.02.044 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.2007.00233.x https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.132 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3181-z https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103730 https://www.fao.org/3/i3434e/i3434e.pdf 220 M. Morkūnas et al. Can climate-smart agriculture help to assure food security through short supply... FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP, & WHO. (2021). The state of food security and nutrition in the world 2021. Transforming food systems for food security, improved nutrition and affordable healthy diets for all. Rome. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb4474en Ferguson, G., Perez-Llantada, C., & Plo, R. (2011). English as an international language of scientific publication: A study of attitudes. World Englishes, 30(1), 41–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.2010.01656.x Floris, N., & Schwarcz, P. (2018). Potential of short food supply chains, their role and support within the rural development policy in the Slovak Republic. Acta Regionalia et Environmentalica, 15, 15–21. https://doi.org/10.2478/aree-2018-0004 Forman, E., & Peniwati, K. (1998). Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 108(1), 165–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00244-0 Garnett, T. (2013). Food sustainability: problems, perspectives and solutions. Proceedings of the Nutri- tion Society, 72(1), 29–39. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0029665112002947 Gillman, A., Campbell, D. C., & Spang, E. S. (2019). Does on-farm food loss prevent waste? Insights from California produce growers. Resourources, Conservation and Recycling, 150, 104408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104408 Godfray, H. C. J., Beddington, J. R., Crute, I. R., Haddad, L., Lawrence, D., Muir, J. F., Pretty, J., Rob- inson, S., Thomas, S. M., & Toulmin, C. (2010). Food security: the challenge of feeding 9 billion people. Science, 327(5967), 812–818. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1185383 Goossens, Y., Berrens, P., Custers, K., Van Hemelryck, S., Kellens, K., & Geeraerd, A. (2019). Correction to: How origin, packaging and seasonality determine the environmental impact of apples, magnified by food waste and losses. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 24, 688–693. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-018-1555-4 Gregory, P. J., Ingram, J. S., & Brklacich, M. (2005). Climate change and food security.  Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 360(1463), 2139–2148. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1745 Gružauskas, V., Baskutis, S., & Navickas, V. (2018). Minimizing the trade-off between sustainability and cost effective performance by using autonomous vehicles. Journal of Cleaner Production, 184, 709–717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.302 Grzybowska, K., Awasthi, A., & Hussain, M. (2014, September 7–10). Modeling enablers for sustainable logistics collaboration integrating – Canadian and Polish perspectives. In Proceedings of the 2014 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems, Warsaw, Poland (pp.  1311– 1319). Gunders, D. (2012). Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork to landfill. Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). https://www.ccrrc.org/wp-content/uploads/ sites/24/2014/03/wasted-food-IP.pdf Habib, R., & Afzal, M. T. (2019). Sections-based bibliographic coupling for research paper recommen- dation. Scientometrics, 119(2), 643–656. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03053-8 Hartikainen, H., Mogensen, L., Svanes, E., & Franke, U. (2018). Food waste quantification in primary production – the Nordic countries as a case study. Waste Management, 71, 502–511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.10.026 Hermsdorf, D., Rombach, M., & Bitsch, V. (2017). Food waste reduction practices in German food retail. British Food Journal, 119(2), 2532–2546. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-06-2017-0338 Hickey, M., & Ozbay, G. (2014). Food waste in the United States: A contributing factor toward envi- ronmental instability. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 2, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2014.00051 Hoang, V. (2021) Modern short food supply chain, good agricultural practices, and sustainability: A conceptual framework and case study in Vietnam. Agronomy, 11, 2408. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11122408 https://doi.org/10.4060/cb4474en https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.2010.01656.x https://doi.org/10.2478/aree-2018-0004 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00244-0 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0029665112002947 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104408 https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1185383 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-018-1555-4 https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1745 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.302 https://www.ccrrc.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/24/2014/03/wasted-food-IP.pdf https://www.ccrrc.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/24/2014/03/wasted-food-IP.pdf https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03053-8 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.10.026 https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-06-2017-0338 https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2014.00051 https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11122408 Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 2022, 20(2): 207–223 221 Hobbs, J. E. (2020). Food supply chains during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Canadian Journal of Agricul- tural Economics/Revue canadienne d’agroeconomie, 68(2), 171–176. https://doi.org/10.1111/cjag.12237 Ilbery, B., & Maye, D. (2005). Alternative (shorter) food supply chains and specialist livestock products in the Scottish–English borders. Environment and Planning A, 37(5), 823–844. https://doi.org/10.1068/a3717 Janousek, A., Markey, S., & Roseland, M. (2018). We see a real opportunity around food waste: explor- ing the relationship between on-farm food waste and farm characteristics Agroecology and Sustain- able Food Systems, 42(8), 933–960. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2018.1468381 Jarzebowski, S., Bourlakis, M., & Bezat-Jarzebowska, A. (2020). Short food supply chains (SFSC) as local and sustainable systems. Sustainability, 12(11). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12114715 Kamble, S. S., Gunasekaran, A., & Gawankar, S. A. (2020). Achieving sustainable performance in a data-driven agriculture supply chain: A review for research and applications. International Journal of Production Economics, 219, 179–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.05.022 Kaur, H. (2021). Modelling internet of things driven sustainable food security system. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 28(5), 1740–1760. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-12-2018-0431 Kiss, K., Ruszkai, C., & Takács-György, K. (2019). Examination of short supply chains based on circular economy and sustainability aspects. Resources, 8(4), 161. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources8040161 Krishna Bahadur, K. C., Haque, I., Legwegoh, A. F., & Fraser, E. D. G. (2016). Strategies to reduce food loss in the global south. Sustainability, 8(7), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8070595 Li, Y., Li, Y. F., Kappas, M., & Pavao-Zuckerman, M. (2018). Identifying the key catastrophic variables of urban social-environmental resilience and early warning signal. Environment International, 113, 184–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.02.006 Lioutas, E. D., & Charatsari, C. (2020). Smart farming and short food supply chains: Are they compat- ible?. Land Use Policy, 94, 104541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104541 Magalhães, V., Ferreira, L. M. D. F., & Silva, C. (2019). Causes of food loss and waste: An analysis along the food supply chain. In J. Reis, S. Pinelas, & N. Melão (Eds.), Springer Proceedings in Mathematics & Statistics: Vol. 280. Industrial Engineering and Operations Management I. IJCIEOM 2018. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14969-7_15 Marsden, T., Banks, J., & Bristow, G. (2000). Food supply chain approaches: exploring their role in rural development. Sociologia ruralis, 40(4), 424–438. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9523.00158 Maseda, A., Iturralde, T., Cooper, S., & Aparicio, G. (2022). Mapping women’s involvement in family firms: A review based on bibliographic coupling analysis. International Journal of Management Reviews, 24(2), 279–305. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12278 McKenzie, T. J., Singh-Peterson, L., & Underhill, S. J. R. (2017). Quantifying postharvest loss and the implication of market-based decisions: A case study of two commercial domestic tomato supply chains in Queensland, Australia. Horticulturae, 3(3), 44. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae3030044 McLaughlin, D., & Kinzelbach, W. (2015). Food security and sustainable resource management. Water Resources Research, 51(7), 4966–4985. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR017053 Mena, C., Adenso-Diaz, B., & Yurt, O. (2011). The causes of food waste in the supplier-retailer inter- face: Evidences from the UK and Spain. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 55(6), 648–658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2010.09.006 Mirabelli, G., & Solina, V. (2019). Blockchain and agricultural supply chains traceability: Research trends and future challenges. Procedia Manufacturing, 42, 414–421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2020.02.054 Mithun Ali, S., Moktadir, M. A., Kabir, G., Chakma, J., Rumi, M. J. U., & Islam, M. T. (2019).Framework for evaluating risks in food supply chain: Implications in food wastage reduction. Journal of Cleaner Production, 228, 786–800. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.322 https://doi.org/10.1068/a3717 https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2018.1468381 https://doi.org/10.3390/su12114715 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.05.022 https://www.emerald.com/insight/search?q=Harpreet%20Kaur https://www.emerald.com/insight/publication/issn/1463-5771 https://www.emerald.com/insight/publication/issn/1463-5771 https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-12-2018-0431 https://doi.org/10.3390/resources8040161 https://doi.org/10.3390/su8070595 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.02.006 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104541 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14969-7_15 https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9523.00158 https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12278 https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae3030044 https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR017053 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2010.09.006 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2020.02.054 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.322 222 M. Morkūnas et al. Can climate-smart agriculture help to assure food security through short supply... Molnár, A., Gellynck, X., & Weaver, R. D. (2010). Chain member perception of chain performance: The role of relationship quality. Journal on Chain and Network Science, 10(1), 27–49. https://doi.org/10.3920/JCNS2010.x103 Morkunas, M., & Balezentis, T. (2021). Is agricultural revitalization possible through the climate-smart agriculture: a systematic review and citation-based analysis. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 33(2), 257–280. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-06-2021-0149 Morkunas, M., Žičkienė, A., Baležentis, T., Volkov, A., Štreimikienė, D., & Ribašauskienė, E. (2022). Challenges for improving agricultural resilience in the context of sustainability and rural develop- ment. Wyzwania dla poprawy resilencji w rolnictwie w kontekście zrównoważonego rozwoju i rozwoju obszarów wiejskich. Problemy ekorozwoju, 17(1), 182–195. https://doi.org/10.35784/pe.2022.1.17 Nchanji, E. B., & Lutomia, C. K. (2021). Regional impact of COVID-19 on the production and food security of common bean smallholder farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa: Implication for SDG’s. Global Food Security, 29, 100524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2021.100524 Opitz, I., Berges, R., Piorr, A., & Krikser, T. (2016). Contributing to food security in urban areas: differ- ences between urban agriculture and peri-urban agriculture in the Global North. Agriculture and Human Values, 33(2), 341–358. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-015-9610-2 Paciarotti, C., & Torregiani, F. (2021). The logistics of the short food supply chain: A literature review. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 26, 428–442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.10.002 Peira, G., Bollani, L., Giachino, C., & Bonadonna, A. (2018). The management of unsold food in out- door market areas: Food operators’ behaviour and attitudes. Sustainability, 10(4), 1180. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10041180 Raak, N., Symmank, C., Zahn, S., Aschemann-Witzel, J., & Rohm, H. (2017). Processing- and product- related causes for food waste and implications for the food supply chain. Waste Management, 61, 461–472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2016.12.027 Rauschmayer, F., Bauler, T., & Schäpke, N. (2015). Towards a thick understanding of sustainability transitions – Linking transition management, capabilities and social practices. Ecological Economics, 109, 211–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.11.018 Reddy, P. P. (2015). Climate resilient agriculture for ensuring food security (Vol. 373). Springer India. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2199-9 Renting, H., Marsden, T. K., & Banks, J. (2003). Understanding alternative food networks: exploring the role of short food supply chains in rural development.  Environment and Planning A,  35(3), 393–411. https://doi.org/10.1068/a3510 Rijpkema, W. A., Rossi, R., & van der Vorst, J. G. A. J. (2014). Effective sourcing strategies for perishable product supply chains. International. Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 44, 494–510. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-01-2013-0013 Rivera-Ferre, M. G., López-i-Gelats, F., Ravera, F., Oteros-Rozas, E., di Masso, M., Binimelis, R., & El Bi- lali, H. (2021). The two-way relationship between food systems and the COVID19 pandemic: Causes and consequences. Agricultural Systems, 191, 103134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2021.103134 Sellitto, M. A., Vial, L. A. M., & Viegas, C. V. (2018). Critical success factors in short food supply chains: Case studies with milk and dairy producers from Italy and Brazil. Journal of Cleaner Production, 170, 1361–1368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.235 Shah, S. H. H., Lei, S., Ali, M., Doronin, D., & Hussain, S. T. (2019). Prosumption: Bibliometric analysis us- ing HistCite and VOSviewer. Kybernetes, 49(3), 1020–1045. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-12-2018-0696 Smith, K., Lawrence, G., MacMahon, A., Muller, J., & Brady, M. (2016). The resilience of long and short food chains: A case study of flooding in Queensland, Australia.  Agriculture and Human Values, 33(1), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-015-9603-1 https://doi.org/10.3920/JCNS2010.x103 https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-06-2021-0149 https://doi.org/10.35784/pe.2022.1.17 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2021.100524 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-015-9610-2 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.10.002 https://doi.org/10.3390/su10041180 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2016.12.027 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.11.018 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2199-9 https://doi.org/10.1068/a3510 https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-01-2013-0013 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2021.103134 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.235 https://doi.org/10.1108/K-12-2018-0696 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-015-9603-1 Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 2022, 20(2): 207–223 223 Stanciu, M., Popescu, A., & Rasvan, R. I. (2022). Short food supply chains and young pepople’s at- titude towards healthy eating. Economic Engineering in Agriculture and Rural Development, 22(1), 2285–3952. Stevano, S., Johnston, D., & Codjoe, E. (2020). Better decisions for food security? Critical reflections on the economics of food choice and decision-making in development economics. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 44(4), 813–833. https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/beaa012 Teller, C., Holweg, C., Reiner, G., & Kotzab, H. (2018). Retail store operations and food waste. Journal of Cleaner Production, 185, 981–997. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.280 Thurner, S., Liu, W., Klimek, P., & Cheong, S. A. (2020). The role of mainstreamness and interdiscipli- narity for the relevance of scientific papers. PloS ONE, 15(4), e0230325. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230325 Todorova, S. (2020). Short food supply chains as drivers of sustainability in rural areas. Scientific Papers. Series “Management, Economic Engineering in Agriculture and Rural Development”, 20, 483–491. Torero, M. (2020). Without food, there can be no exit from the pandemic. Nature, 580, 588–589. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-01181-3 Tuomala, V., & Grant, D. B. (2021). Exploring supply chain issues affecting food access and security among urban poor in South Africa. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 33(5), 27–48. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLM-01-2021-0007 Tweeten, L. (1999). The economics of global food security. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 21(2), 473–488. https://doi.org/10.2307/1349892 Ulian, T., Diazgranados, M., Pironon, S., Padulosi, S., Liu, U., Davies, L., Howes, M.-J. R., Borreli, J. S., Ondo, J., Pérez-Escobar, O. A., Sharrock, S., Ryan, P., Hunter, D., Lee, M. A., Barstow, C., Łuczaj, Ł., Pieroni, A., Cámara-Leret, R., Noorani, A., Mba, C., Nono Womdim, R., Muminjanov, H., Antonel- li, A., Pritchard, H. W., & Mattana, E. (2020). Unlocking plant resources to support food security and promote sustainable agriculture. Plants, People, Planet, 2(5), 421–445. https://doi.org/10.1002/ppp3.10145 Vojtovic, S., Navickas, V., & Gruzauskas, V. (2016). Sustainable business development process: The case of the food and beverage industry. Organizacja i Zarządzanie, 68, 225–239. Wohner, B., Gabriel, V. H., Krenn, B., Krauter, V., & Tacker, M. (2020). Environmental and economic assessment of food-packaging systems with a focus on food waste. Case study on tomato ketchup. Science of the Total Environment, 738, 139846. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139846 Workie, E., Mackolil, J., Nyika, J., & Ramadas, S. (2020). Deciphering the impact of COVID-19 pan- demic on food security, agriculture, and livelihoods: A review of the evidence from developing countries. Current Research in Environmental Sustainability, 2, 100014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crsust.2020.100014 Xue, L., Liu, G., Parfitt, J., Liu, X., Van Herpen, E., Stenmarck, A., O’Connor, C., Östergren, K., & Cheng, S. (2017). Missing food, missing data? A critical review of global food losses and food waste data. Environ- mental Science & Technology, 51(12), 6618–6633. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b00401 Xu, Z., Elomri, A., El Omri, A., Kerbache, L., & Liu, H. (2021). The compounded effects of COVID-19 pandemic and desert locust outbreak on food security and food supply chain. Sustainability, 13(3), 1063. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13031063 Yang, S., Xiao, Y., & Kuo, Y. H. (2017). The supply chain design for perishable food with stochastic demand. Sustainability, 9, 1195. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9071195 Yu, Y., Li, Y., Zhang, Z., Gu, Z., Zhong, H., Zha, Q., Yang, L., & Chen, E. (2020). A bibliometric analysis using VOSviewer of publications on COVID-19. Annals of Translational Medicine, 8(13). https://doi.org/10.21037/atm-20-4235 Zhu, L. (2017). Economic analysis of a traceability system for a two-level perishable food supply chain. Sustainability, 9, 682. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9050682 https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/beaa012 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.280 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230325 https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-01181-3 https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLM-01-2021-0007 https://doi.org/10.2307/1349892 https://doi.org/10.1002/ppp3.10145 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139846 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crsust.2020.100014 https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b00401 https://doi.org/10.3390/su13031063 https://doi.org/10.3390/su9071195 https://doi.org/10.21037/atm-20-4235 https://doi.org/10.3390/su9050682