Call for Papers: Special Issue on
Sustainable Agriculture and Supply Chains
Background
The idea that small, family-run farms are the source of most of our food in agricultural supply
chains has given way in many countries to an industrial system of mass food processing (Clapp,
2021). This type of production system typically seeks to reduce costs and increase efficiency
(Mayorga et al., 2019; Zuzworsky, 2001), a goal that is at the heart of much or our operations
management (OM) thinking. What is also at the heart of agricultural systems, however, are
people, livestock, and ecosystems that are not so readily fit to the ideals of efficiency. While the
impact of efficient agricultural production on workers and animals has been discussed for some
time, mostly outside of OM (e.g., Singer and Mason, 2007; Pollan, 2007; Pullman and Wu,
2021), recent labor and food crises have brought to the fore issues of unethical and inhumane
production conditions for both humans and animals (Dyal, 2020). As policymakers, consumers,
and society begin to recognize the problems inherent in industrial food systems, we also
recognize that such systems are institutionalized and must ensure food availability for the world’s
population.
The essence of OM is to transform inputs into outputs in an efficient and effective manner.
Efficiency is usually understood as a low level of slack or excess capacity in an operation or
supply chain (Eroglu and Hofer, 2011; Wiengarten et al., 2017). Yet, systems focused on process
efficiency and cost reduction are likely not sustainable for animals or people working within
them, and consumers increasingly find the consequences of such systems morally unacceptable
(Broom, 2010). More research is needed to explore the animal and human welfare and social and
environmental sustainability implications of a relatively small number of large corporations
controlling global food supply chains.
Recent articles in the Journal of Operations Management (JOM) indicate that the operational
goal should be “maximizing value” rather than reducing waste (see Browning and de Treville,
2021; Cusumano et al., 2021), and that value can vary by stakeholder. This can mean adding
rather than removing activities and resources (Browning, 2003; Browning and de Treville, 2021),
as too much focus on efficiency can have negative consequences for people (Wiengarten et al.,
2017), land, and livestock. For example, the agricultural sector has been described as a significant
exploiter of temporary and undocumented labor (Rye and Scott, 2018). The conditions under
which animals are handled, housed, transported, and slaughtered in supply chains have also been
criticized by many (e.g., for popular culture see: Gunda, Food Inc., or Forks Over Knives; or
Pollan, 2006). Striving for efficient operations in factory farming led to poor living conditions
for and abuse of animals, which in turn has resulted in public health problems for humans as well
(Mench, 2002; WHO, 2014; Webster, 2005). While some governments have begun to address
issues such as humane treatment of animals, temporary employment, and working conditions,
these issues so far have received little research attention in OM (Wiengarten et al, 2021; Simpson
et al, 2021).
1
Special Issue (SI) Focus
This special issue (SI) aims to stimulate operations and supply chain research to consider
sustainable agriculture in terms of animal, human, and ecological well-being in the context of
food production/supply chain. The SI invites contributions that clearly relate to operations
management and provide insights into how organizations, their supply chains, and institutions
achieve/link society, environment, profit, and animal welfare through management, strategy,
technology, or operations. The focus is on animal welfare and social/ecological sustainability,
but other agriculture and sustainability related submissions are welcome as well, though the guest
editors should be contacted first.
This SI is open to all empirical methods that fall within the scope of JOM, including but not
limited to case studies, large-scale surveys, laboratory and field experiments, and other
approaches. Perspectives drawn from outside of OM are also strongly encouraged, but
manuscripts must have an OM centricity. Please refer to JOM’s editorial guidelines for specific
details (Browning & de Treville, 2018).
Some possible topics for this SI include, but are not limited to:
• Attempts to align animal welfare with sustainability
• Consumer visibility into supply chain sourcing; traceability from initial sources to
consumer
• Disruption of agriculture and supply chains by COVID and implications for sustainability
• Energy, water flow, and carbon footprint measures implication to production network
design and production practices
• Exercise of power in food supply chains and sustainability consequences
• “Factory” farming practices and their sustainability
• Food movements and their implications for factory farming operations/supply chains
• Labor exploitation in food production; temporary labor / migrant worker in agricultural
supply chains; labor migration effects on factory farming operations/supply chains
• (New) business models and forms of organizing agricultural production such as
cooperatives, food shed
• Occupational health and safety and working conditions in food supply chains
• Production standards and food standards and certification to reduce animal/human suffering
in food supply chains
• Sustainability (from an embedded/ecological dominant logic) in agricultural enterprise
systems
• Tradeoffs between efficiency and effectiveness, such as in animal handling
• Tradeoffs between short-term and long-term perspectives in agricultural operations and
supply chains
• Transitional problems in the transition from traditional factory farming to sustainable
agriculture.
We remind researchers to adhere to the high standards of JOM by following the author guidelines.
Timeline
Submissions must be received by July 31, 2023, with first-round decisions targeted by three
months after the submission deadline. We will begin to process submissions as they come in, so
earlier submissions are welcome.
2
Guest Editors
Questions may be sent to any, or all, of the SI guest editors, at any time:
Christian F. Durach, Professor, ESCP Business School; cdurach@escp.eu.
Dayna Simpson, Professor, Monash Business School, Monash University;
dayna.simpson@monash.edu
Frank Wiengarten, Professor, ESADE School of Business, Ramon Llull University; Associate
Editor, JOM; frank.wiengarten@esade.edu
Zhaohui Wu, Professor, College of Business, Oregon State University; Associate Editor, JOM;
wuz@oregonstate.edu
References
Broom, D.M., 2010. Animal welfare: an aspect of care, sustainability, and food quality required by the public. Journal
of Veterinary Medical Education 37, 83-88.
Browning, T.R., 2003. On customer value and improvement in product development processes. Systems Engineering
6, 49-61.
Browning, T.R., de Treville, S., 2021. A lean view of lean. Journal of Operations Management, 67, 640-652.
Clapp, J., 2021. The problem with growing corporate concentration and power in the global food system. Nature
Food 2, 404-408.
Cusumano, M.A., Holweg, M., Howell, J., Netland, T., Shah, R., Shook, J., Ward, P., Womack, J., 2021. Commentaries
on “The Lenses of Lean.” Journal of Operations Management 67, 627–639.
Mayorga, E.J., Renaudeau, D., Ramirez, B.C., Ross, J.W., Baumgard, L.H., 2019. Heat stress adaptations in pigs.
Animal Frontiers 9, 54-61.
Mench, J.A., 2002. Broiler breeders: feed restriction and welfare. World’s Poultry Science Journal 58, 23-29.
Pollan, M., 2007. The Omnivore’s Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals, Reprint edition. Penguin Books, New
York, NY.
Pullman, M., Wu, Z., 2021. Food Supply Chain Management: Building a Sustainable Future, 2e, Routledge.
Rye, J.F., Scott, S., 2018. International Labour Migration and Food Production in Rural Europe: A Review of the
Evidence. Sociologia Ruralis 58, 928-952.
Simpson, D., Segrave, M., Quarshie, A., Kach, A., Handfield, R., Panas, G., Moore, H., 2021. The role of
psychological distance in organizational responses to modern slavery risk in supply chains. Journal of
Operations Management 67, 989-1016.
Singer, P., Mason, J., 2007. The Ethics of What We Eat: Why Our Food Choices Matter. Rodale Books, Emmaus, PA.
Webster, J., 2005. Animal Welfare: Limping Towards Eden: A Practical Approach to Redressing the Problem of Our
Dominion Over the Animals, 2e. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Oxford, UK.
WHO, 2014. Antimicrobial resistance: global report on surveillance. World Health Organization.
Wiengarten, F., Fan, D., Lo, C.K.Y., Pagell, M., 2017. The differing impacts of operational and financial slack on
occupational safety in varying market conditions. Journal of Operations Management 52, 30-45.
Wiengarten, F., Pagell, M., Durach, C.F., Humphreys, P., 2021. Exploring the performance implications of precarious
work. Journal of Operations Management 67, 926-963.
Zuzworsky, R., 2001. From the Marketplace to the Dinner Plate: The Economy, Theology, and Factory Farming.
Journal of Business Ethics 29, 177-188.
3