Understanding the Stickiness of Commodity Supply Chains Is Key to Improving Their Sustainability

Abstract

•Stickiness is key for accountability of supply-chain actors•The soy traders with the largest market share are geographically stickier•Stickier traders also show higher soy-deforestation risk•Stickier traders are also signatories of zero-deforestation commitments Consumption of food in locations far from production is a cause of forest loss, especially in developing countries that lack the resources, capacity, or political will to distinguish legal from illegal deforestation. In response, civil society and consumers have pushed companies to make zero-deforestation commitments. For these commitments to be effective, supply chain transparency is crucial, but stickiness also plays a key role. Stickiness refers to stable and consistent commercial relationships between companies and regions. Stickiness may influence how companies attain zero-deforestation commitments. For instance, companies with non-sticky sourcing patterns may move geographically, not committing to achieving long-term sustainability. Here, we look at the soy trade in Brazil, the world's largest exporter, to analyze supply chain stickiness and explain why it is essential to curb deforestation. We show that stickiness is associated with deforestation risk. Commodity trade is central to the global economy but is also associated with socio-environmental impacts, for example, deforestation, especially in producer countries. It is crucial to understand how geographic sourcing patterns of commodities and commercial relationships between places and actors influence land-use dynamics, socio-economic development, and environmental degradation. Here, we propose a concept and methodological approach to analyze the geographic stickiness of commodity supply chains, which is the maintenance of supply network configurations over time and across perturbations. We showcase policy-relevant metrics for all Brazilian soy exports between 2003 and 2017, using high-resolution supply chain data from www.trase.earth. We find that the Brazilian soy traders with the largest market share exhibit stickier geographic sourcing patterns, and that the supply network configurations between production places and traders become increasingly sticky in subsequent years. Understanding trade stickiness is crucial for supply chain accountability, because it directly affects the effectiveness of zero-deforestation commitments. Commodity trade is central to the global economy but is also associated with socio-environmental impacts, for example, deforestation, especially in producer countries. It is crucial to understand how geographic sourcing patterns of commodities and commercial relationships between places and actors influence land-use dynamics, socio-economic development, and environmental degradation. Here, we propose a concept and methodological approach to analyze the geographic stickiness of commodity supply chains, which is the maintenance of supply network configurations over time and across perturbations. We showcase policy-relevant metrics for all Brazilian soy exports between 2003 and 2017, using high-resolution supply chain data from www.trase.earth. We find that the Brazilian soy traders with the largest market share exhibit stickier geographic sourcing patterns, and that the supply network configurations between production places and traders become increasingly sticky in subsequent years. Understanding trade stickiness is crucial for supply chain accountability, because it directly affects the effectiveness of zero-deforestation commitments. Over recent decades, the growth in agricultural trade has promoted economic development and food security but also resulted in negative socio-economic and environmental impacts.1Paitan C.P. Verburg P. Methods to assess the impacts and indirect land use change caused by telecoupled agricultural supply chains : a review.Sustainability. 2019; 11: 1162Crossref Scopus (13) Google Scholar, 2Friis C. Nielsen J.Ø. Land-use change in a telecoupled world: the relevance and applicability of the telecoupling framework in the case of banana plantation expansion in Laos.Ecol. Soc. 2017; 22: 30Crossref Scopus (27) Google Scholar, 3World BankMerchandise Trade (% of GDP). 2019. The World Bank, 2019https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/TG.VAL.TOTL.GD.ZSGoogle Scholar, 4da Silva R. Batistella M. Dou Y. Moran E. Torres S. Liu J. The Sino-Brazilian telecoupled soybean system and cascading effects for the exporting country.Land. 2017; 6: 53Crossref Scopus (49) Google Scholar Trade and consumption of agricultural commodities are critical drivers of land-use change, deforestation, biodiversity loss,5Green J.M.H. Croft S.A. Durán A.P. Balmford A.P. Burgess N.D. Fick S. Gardner T.A. Godar J. Suavet C. Virah-Sawmy M. et al.Linking global drivers of agricultural trade to on-the-ground impacts on biodiversity.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U S A. 2019; 116: 23202-23208Crossref PubMed Scopus (56) Google Scholar,6Curtis P.G. Slay C.M. Harris N.L. Tyukavina A. Hansen M.C. Classifying drivers of global forest loss.Science. 2018; 361: 1108-1111Crossref PubMed Scopus (700) Google Scholar and carbon emissions.7Pendrill F. Persson U.M. Godar J. Kastner T. Deforestation displaced: trade in forest-risk commodities and the prospects for a global forest transition.Environ. Res. Lett. 2019; 14: 055003Crossref Scopus (88) Google Scholar,8Meyfroidt P. Carlson K.M. Fagan M.E. Gutiérrez-Vélez V.H. Macedo M.N. Curran L.M. DeFries R.S. Dyer G.A. Gibbs H.K. Lambin E.F. et al.Multiple pathways of commodity crop expansion in tropical forest landscapes.Environ. Res. Lett. 2014; 9: 074012Crossref Scopus (120) Google Scholar The production of internationally traded and financed commodities, such as soy (see Supplemental Experimental Procedures, The Soy Supply Chain in Brazil), beef, and palm oil, dominates land use in many agricultural regions. It is responsible for over 27% of recent global forest loss.6Curtis P.G. Slay C.M. Harris N.L. Tyukavina A. Hansen M.C. Classifying drivers of global forest loss.Science. 2018; 361: 1108-1111Crossref PubMed Scopus (700) Google Scholar Supply chain actors, such as food processors, slaughterhouses, traders, and retailers, including countries that purchase these commodities, play a crucial role in shaping land-use dynamics by influencing demand, investments in infrastructure, financing, and government decisions.9Folke C. Österblom H. Jouffray J.-B. Lambin E.F. Adger W.N. Scheffer M. Crona B.I. Nyström M. Levin S.A. Carpenter S.R. et al.Transnational corporations and the challenge of biosphere stewardship.Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2019; 3: 1396-1403Crossref PubMed Scopus (121) Google Scholar, 10Galaz V. Crona B. Dauriach A. Jouffray J.-B. Österblom H. Fichtner J. Tax havens and global environmental degradation.Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2018; 2: 1352-1357Crossref PubMed Scopus (45) Google Scholar, 11Heron T. Prado P. West C. Global value chains and the governance of ‘embedded’ food commodities: the case of soy.Glob. Policy. 2018; 9: 29-37Crossref Scopus (18) Google Scholar An increasing number of governance interventions target these supply chain actors, including pushes for zero-deforestation commitments (ZDC). ZDCs aim to zero the deforestation driven by commodity supply chains, such as palm oil, beef, or soy. There are ZDCs signed by individual companies, but also by multi-stakeholder coalitions, including national and subnational governments and non-government organizations (NGOs), where each stakeholder assumes a specific role. For example, companies implement ZDCs, NGOs monitor compliance, and governments provide the tools. Examples of ZDCs can be in the form of sustainability roundtables (e.g., Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil), and broader governance fora (e.g., Tropical Forests Alliance).12Lambin E.F. Gibbs H.K. Heilmayr R. Carlson K.M. Fleck L.C. Garrett R.D. le Polain de Waroux Y. McDermott C.L. McLaughlin D. Newton P. et al.The role of supply-chain initiatives in reducing deforestation.Nat. Clim. Chang. 2018; 8: 109-116Crossref Scopus (179) Google Scholar The Amazon Soy Moratorium (ASM), another ZDC example, was the first voluntary ZDC in the tropics. It was a response from soy traders to pressure from retailers and NGOs, resulting in the agreement to not purchase soy from areas deforested after July 2006 in the Brazilian Amazon. The ASM is reputed to have reduced direct deforestation to soy fields from 30% to 1% of annual soy expansion in the Brazilian Amazon.13Gibbs H.K. Rausch L. Munger J. Schelly I. Morton D.C. Noojipady P. Soares-Filho B. Barreto P. Micol L. Walker N.F. Brazil’s soy moratorium.Science. 2015; 347: 377-378Crossref PubMed Scopus (364) Google Scholar ZDCs, combined with public policies, are crucial to address deforestation, as commodity supply chains drive about 5 million hectares of forest loss every year.6Curtis P.G. Slay C.M. Harris N.L. Tyukavina A. Hansen M.C. Classifying drivers of global forest loss.Science. 2018; 361: 1108-1111Crossref PubMed Scopus (700) Google Scholar ZDCs result from consumer demand and NGO pressure,12Lambin E.F. Gibbs H.K. Heilmayr R. Carlson K.M. Fleck L.C. Garrett R.D. le Polain de Waroux Y. McDermott C.L. McLaughlin D. Newton P. et al.The role of supply-chain initiatives in reducing deforestation.Nat. Clim. Chang. 2018; 8: 109-116Crossref Scopus (179) Google Scholar,14Gardner T.A. Benzie M. Börner J. Dawkins E. Fick S. Garrett R. Godar J. Grimard A. Lake S. Larsen R.K. et al.Transparency and sustainability in global commodity supply chains.World Dev. 2019; 121: 163-177Crossref PubMed Scopus (136) Google Scholar,15Garrett R.D. Levy S. Carlson K.M. Gardner T.A. Godar J. Clapp J. Dauvergne P. Heilmayr R. le Polain de Waroux Y. Ayre B. et al.Criteria for effective zero-deforestation commitments.Glob. Environ. Chang. 2019; 54: 135-147Crossref Scopus (60) Google Scholar but also from corporate recognition that sustainability commitments may increase both supply chain control and reputation.16Dauvergne P. Lister J. Eco-Business: A Big-Brand Takeover of Sustainability. MIT Press Books, 2013Crossref Google Scholar The accountability and engagement of supply chain upstream actors are thus critical for these initiatives to be successful and deliver the expected impacts. In agricultural supply chains, for example, implementing ZDCs requires the engagement between food buyers, processors, and farmers.14Gardner T.A. Benzie M. Börner J. Dawkins E. Fick S. Garrett R. Godar J. Grimard A. Lake S. Larsen R.K. et al.Transparency and sustainability in global commodity supply chains.World Dev. 2019; 121: 163-177Crossref PubMed Scopus (136) Google Scholar,17Global CanopyForest 500 2019 Annual Report - the Companies Getting it Wrong on Deforestation. Global Canopy, 2019https://forest500.org/publications/forest-500-annual-report-2019-companies-getting-it-wrong-deforestationGoogle Scholar, 18zu Ermgassen E.K.H.J. Ayre B. Godar J. Bastos Lima M.G. Bauch S. Garrett R. Green J. Lathuillière M.J. Löfgren P. MacFarquhar C. et al.Using supply chain data to monitor zero deforestation commitments: an assessment of progress in the Brazilian soy sector.Environ. Res. Lett. 2020; 15: 035003Crossref Scopus (36) Google Scholar, 19Meijer K.S. A comparative analysis of the effectiveness of four supply chain initiatives to reduce deforestation.Trop. Conserv. Sci. 2015; 8: 583-597Crossref Scopus (13) Google Scholar Understanding the geographic patterns of supply chain relationships can contribute to holding corporations accountable for what happens in the production regions to which they are linked.14Gardner T.A. Benzie M. Börner J. Dawkins E. Fick S. Garrett R. Godar J. Grimard A. Lake S. Larsen R.K. et al.Transparency and sustainability in global commodity supply chains.World Dev. 2019; 121: 163-177Crossref PubMed Scopus (136) Google Scholar,18zu Ermgassen E.K.H.J. Ayre B. Godar J. Bastos Lima M.G. Bauch S. Garrett R. Green J. Lathuillière M.J. Löfgren P. MacFarquhar C. et al.Using supply chain data to monitor zero deforestation commitments: an assessment of progress in the Brazilian soy sector.Environ. Res. Lett. 2020; 15: 035003Crossref Scopus (36) Google Scholar,20Nolte C. Gobbi B. le Polain de Waroux Y. Piquer-Rodríguez M. Butsic V. Lambin E.F. Challenges in attributing avoided deforestation to policies and actors: lessons from provincial forest zoning in the argentine dry chaco.Ecol. Econ. 2018; 150: 346-352Crossref Scopus (11) Google Scholar Supply chain transparency is a prerequisite for corporate land use accountability14Gardner T.A. Benzie M. Börner J. Dawkins E. Fick S. Garrett R. Godar J. Grimard A. Lake S. Larsen R.K. et al.Transparency and sustainability in global commodity supply chains.World Dev. 2019; 121: 163-177Crossref PubMed Scopus (136) Google Scholar and the monitoring of ZDCs,18zu Ermgassen E.K.H.J. Ayre B. Godar J. Bastos Lima M.G. Bauch S. Garrett R. Green J. Lathuillière M.J. Löfgren P. MacFarquhar C. et al.Using supply chain data to monitor zero deforestation commitments: an assessment of progress in the Brazilian soy sector.Environ. Res. Lett. 2020; 15: 035003Crossref Scopus (36) Google Scholar such as through the accountability framework initiative (https://accountability-framework.org/). Knowledge of how much, how, and why supply chain actors engage with each other and with specific sourcing regions remains limited. Moreover, we need an improved understanding of how and why actors shift sourcing locations over time and how this influences land-use dynamics and socio-environmental outcomes.12Lambin E.F. Gibbs H.K. Heilmayr R. Carlson K.M. Fleck L.C. Garrett R.D. le Polain de Waroux Y. McDermott C.L. McLaughlin D. Newton P. et al.The role of supply-chain initiatives in reducing deforestation.Nat. Clim. Chang. 2018; 8: 109-116Crossref Scopus (179) Google Scholar,15Garrett R.D. Levy S. Carlson K.M. Gardner T.A. Godar J. Clapp J. Dauvergne P. Heilmayr R. le Polain de Waroux Y. Ayre B. et al.Criteria for effective zero-deforestation commitments.Glob. Environ. Chang. 2019; 54: 135-147Crossref Scopus (60) Google Scholar,19Meijer K.S. A comparative analysis of the effectiveness of four supply chain initiatives to reduce deforestation.Trop. Conserv. Sci. 2015; 8: 583-597Crossref Scopus (13) Google Scholar,21Bastos Lima M.G. Persson U.M. Commodity-centric landscape governance as a double-edged sword: the case of soy and the Cerrado working group in Brazil.Front. For. Glob. Chang. 2020; 3: 1-17Crossref Scopus (23) Google Scholar Researching the patterns of relationships between actors and regions over time is critical to understand different development trajectories in rural landscapes, as these trajectories are shaped by the responses of supply chain actors to biophysical, policy, logistic, or socio-economic shocks and changes.12Lambin E.F. Gibbs H.K. Heilmayr R. Carlson K.M. Fleck L.C. Garrett R.D. le Polain de Waroux Y. McDermott C.L. McLaughlin D. Newton P. et al.The role of supply-chain initiatives in reducing deforestation.Nat. Clim. Chang. 2018; 8: 109-116Crossref Scopus (179) Google Scholar,22Bodin Ö. Crona B.I. The role of social networks in natural resource governance: what relational patterns make a difference?.Glob. Environ. Chang. 2009; 19: 366-374Crossref Scopus (916) Google Scholar,23Meyfroidt P. Roy Chowdhury R. de Bremond A. Ellis E.C. Erb K.-H. Filatova T. Garrett R.D. Grove J.M. Heinimann A. Kuemmerle T. et al.Middle-range theories of land system change.Glob. Environ. Chang. 2018; 53: 52-67Crossref Scopus (204) Google Scholar Examining the spatial-temporal connections between commodity buyers and sourcing regions can support governance and accountability processes by informing on the potential effectiveness of ZDCs,12Lambin E.F. Gibbs H.K. Heilmayr R. Carlson K.M. Fleck L.C. Garrett R.D. le Polain de Waroux Y. McDermott C.L. McLaughlin D. Newton P. et al.The role of supply-chain initiatives in reducing deforestation.Nat. Clim. Chang. 2018; 8: 109-116Crossref Scopus (179) Google Scholar,15Garrett R.D. Levy S. Carlson K.M. Gardner T.A. Godar J. Clapp J. Dauvergne P. Heilmayr R. le Polain de Waroux Y. Ayre B. et al.Criteria for effective zero-deforestation commitments.Glob. Environ. Chang. 2019; 54: 135-147Crossref Scopus (60) Google Scholar and on indirect and leakage effects where sourcing relationships are displaced in response to policy interventions.24de Waroux Y.P. Garrett R.D. Graesser J. Nolte C. White C. Lambin E.F. The restructuring of South American soy and beef production and trade under changing environmental regulations.World Dev. 2017; 121: 188-202Crossref Scopus (50) Google Scholar Markets are not entirely integrated and exhibit some stickiness, i.e., some trading relationships persist under changing conditions or show inertia in responding to price and other shocks.25Villoria N.B. Hertel T.W. Geography matters: international trade patterns and the indirect land use effects of biofuels.Am. J. Agric. Econ. 2011; 93: 919-935Crossref Scopus (54) Google Scholar This persistence is related to various factors, such as supply chain infrastructures in production regions and traders' local expertise.26Garrett R.D. Lambin E.F. Naylor R.L. Land institutions and supply chain configurations as determinants of soybean planted area and yields in Brazil.Land Use Policy. 2013; 31: 385-396Crossref Scopus (79) Google Scholar Agricultural traders that have volatile geographic sourcing patterns likely have weaker connections, credibility, and engagement with farmers, and thus less capacity to transmit the zero-deforestation signal or demand to their suppliers. Volatile traders can move from high to low deforestation risk regions after signing a ZDC, thereby mitigating the direct risks in their supply chains, but failing to improve the overall outcome. Traders with more enduring commercial relationships may have enhanced relevance and impact in their actions. Trade persistence justifies robust accountability frameworks to reduce deforestation in specific supply chains, as it increases the likelihood that these supply chain actions will send a strong and sustained signal to the actors in the production landscapes.14Gardner T.A. Benzie M. Börner J. Dawkins E. Fick S. Garrett R. Godar J. Grimard A. Lake S. Larsen R.K. et al.Transparency and sustainability in global commodity supply chains.World Dev. 2019; 121: 163-177Crossref PubMed Scopus (136) Google Scholar,16Dauvergne P. Lister J. Eco-Business: A Big-Brand Takeover of Sustainability. MIT Press Books, 2013Crossref Google Scholar, 17Global CanopyForest 500 2019 Annual Report - the Companies Getting it Wrong on Deforestation. Global Canopy, 2019https://forest500.org/publications/forest-500-annual-report-2019-companies-getting-it-wrong-deforestationGoogle Scholar, 18zu Ermgassen E.K.H.J. Ayre B. Godar J. Bastos Lima M.G. Bauch S. Garrett R. Green J. Lathuillière M.J. Löfgren P. MacFarquhar C. et al.Using supply chain data to monitor zero deforestation commitments: an assessment of progress in the Brazilian soy sector.Environ. Res. Lett. 2020; 15: 035003Crossref Scopus (36) Google Scholar,27Gollnow F. Hissa L.B.V. Rufin P. Lakes T. Property-level direct and indirect deforestation for soybean production in the Amazon region of Mato Grosso, Brazil.Land Use Policy. 2018; 78: 377-385Crossref Scopus (47) Google Scholar,28Silva C.A. Lima M. Soy moratorium in Mato Grosso: deforestation undermines the agreement.Land Use Policy. 2018; 71: 540-542Crossref Scopus (37) Google Scholar Nevertheless, to date, research has mostly focused on country-to-country persistence of trade relations. Current research lacks a clear conceptual model for defining the relationship between production landscapes, commodity traders, and consuming markets, as well as empirical measures of it, mostly because of insufficiently detailed and subnational data on supply chains. The objectives of this paper are to develop (1) a conceptual framework to analyze the geographic stickiness in global commodity trade, conceived as a measure of the stability and rigidity over time of supply chain configurations, i.e., of the network of trade linkages and flows between specific regions and actors; (2) metrics to operationalize this framework and to measure stickiness empirically; and (3) hypotheses on how stickiness influences the existence and effectiveness of supply chain ZDCs, and, more broadly, the governance of supply chains for socio-environmental sustainability. We focus on agricultural commodities and their relation to land use, but the notion has broader relevance for other supply chains and sustainability issues. Empirically, we use the first supply chain maps linking subnational producing regions of Brazilian soy to global markets, identifying trading companies, between 2003 and 2017, developed by the Trase initiative (www.trase.earth). In the international trade of Brazilian soy, we measure the trade stickiness between specific production and distribution places, companies engaged in trading, and consumption countries.29Trase Brazil soy data. SEI-PCS v2.3.www.trase.earthGoogle Scholar We apply temporal network analysis to measure the similarity of the export supply chain network over time, i.e., how stable are the commercial relationships. We bridge theoretical and empirical approaches from three main fields, agricultural and trade economics, global commodity chains (GCCs) and global value chains (GVCs), and social-ecological resilience,11Heron T. Prado P. West C. Global value chains and the governance of ‘embedded’ food commodities: the case of soy.Glob. Policy. 2018; 9: 29-37Crossref Scopus (18) Google Scholar,15Garrett R.D. Levy S. Carlson K.M. Gardner T.A. Godar J. Clapp J. Dauvergne P. Heilmayr R. le Polain de Waroux Y. Ayre B. et al.Criteria for effective zero-deforestation commitments.Glob. Environ. Chang. 2019; 54: 135-147Crossref Scopus (60) Google Scholar,22Bodin Ö. Crona B.I. The role of social networks in natural resource governance: what relational patterns make a difference?.Glob. Environ. Chang. 2009; 19: 366-374Crossref Scopus (916) Google Scholar,25Villoria N.B. Hertel T.W. Geography matters: international trade patterns and the indirect land use effects of biofuels.Am. J. Agric. Econ. 2011; 93: 919-935Crossref Scopus (54) Google Scholar,30Armington P.S. A theory of demand for products distinguished by place of production.IMF Staff Pap. 1969; 16: 159-178Crossref Google Scholar, 31Agcaoili-Sombilla M.C. Rosegrant M.W. International trade in a differentiated good: trade elasticities in the world rice market.Agric. Econ. 1994; 10: 257-267Crossref Google Scholar, 32Kawashima S. Sari D.A.P. Time-varying Armington elasticity and country-of-origin bias: from the dynamic perspective of the Japanese demand for beef imports.Aust. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 2010; 54: 27-41Crossref Scopus (16) Google Scholar, 33Donnelly W.A. Ingersoll D. Tsigas M. Revised Armington Elasticities of Substitution for the USITC Model and the Concordance for Constructing a Consistent Set for the GTAP Model. OFFICE OF ECONOMICS RESEARCH NOTE - US International Trade Commission, 2004https://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/ec200401a.pdfCrossref Google Scholar, 34Barrot J.N. Sauvagnat J. Input specificity and the propagation of idiosyncratic shocks in production networks.Q. J. Econ. 2016; 131: 1543-1592Crossref Scopus (152) Google Scholar, 35Van Assche A. Schwartz G.A. Input specificity and global sourcing.J. Jpn. Int. Econ. 2010; 24: 69-85Crossref Scopus (6) Google Scholar, 36Turzi M. The Political Economy of Agricultural Booms: Managing Soybean Production in Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay. Palgrave Macmillan, 2017Crossref Scopus (8) Google Scholar, 37Antràs P. Chor D. Organizing the global value chain.Econometrica. 2013; 81: 2127-2204Crossref Scopus (236) Google Scholar, 38Thorlakson T. de Zegher J.F. Lambin E.F. Companies’ contribution to sustainability through global supply chains.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U S A. 2018; 115: 2072-2077Crossref PubMed Scopus (74) Google Scholar, 39Disdier A.-C. Head K. The puzzling persistence of the distance effect on bilateral trade.Rev. Econ. Stat. 2008; 90: 37-48Crossref Scopus (544) Google Scholar, 40Coughlin C.C. Wall H.J. Ethnic networks and trade: intensive versus extensive margins.Econ. Lett. 2011; 113: 73-75Crossref Scopus (24) Google Scholar, 41Head K. Mayer T. Ries J. The erosion of colonial trade linkages after independence.J. Int. Econ. 2010; 81: 1-14Crossref Scopus (472) Google Scholar, 42Rauch J.E. Networks versus markets in international trade.J. Int. Econ. 1999; 48: 7-35Crossref Scopus (1196) Google Scholar, 43Burlando A. Cristea A.D. Lee L.M. The trade consequences of maritime insecurity: evidence from Somali piracy.Rev. Int. Econ. 2015; 23: 525-557Crossref Scopus (8) Google Scholar, 44Yu M. Trade, democracy, and the gravity equation.J. Dev. Econ. 2010; 91: 289-300Crossref Scopus (103) Google Scholar, 45Levchenko A.A. Institutional quality and international trade.Rev. Econ. Stud. 2007; 74: 791-819Crossref Scopus (451) Google Scholar,46Nunn N. Relationship-specificity, incomplete contracts, and the pattern of trade.Q. J. Econ. 2007; May: 569-600Crossref Scopus (606) Google Scholar, 47Polanyi K. The Great Transformation Second. Beacon Press Books, 1944Google Scholar, 48Granovetter M. Economic action and social structure : the problem of embeddedness.Am. J. Sociol. 1985; 91: 481-510Crossref Google Scholar, 49Uzzi B. Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: the paradox of embeddedness.Adm. Sci. Q. 1997; 42: 35-67Crossref Scopus (5929) Google Scholar, 50Krippner G.R. Alvarez A.S. Embeddedness and the intellectual projects of economic sociology.Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2007; 33: 219-240Crossref Scopus (178) Google Scholar, 51Fares M. Magrini M.B. Triboulet P. Transition agroécologique, innovation et effets de verrouillage Le rôle de la structure organisationnelle des filières.Cah. Agric. 2012; 21: 34-45Google Scholar, 52Akkermans H. Emergent supply networks: system dynamics simulation of adaptive supply agents.in: Proceedings of the 34th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 2001: 1-11https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/926299Crossref Scopus (45) Google Scholar, 53Narasimhan R. Nair A. Griffith D.A. Arlbjørn J.S. Bendoly E. Lock-in situations in supply chains: a social exchange theoretic study of sourcing arrangements in buyer-supplier relationships.J. Oper. Manag. 2009; 27: 374-389Crossref Scopus (155) Google Scholar, 54Kepaptsoglou K. Karlaftis M.G. Tsamboulas D. The gravity model specification for modeling international trade flows and free trade agreement effects: a 10-year review of empirical studies.Open Econ. J. 2010; 3: 1-13Crossref Google Scholar, 55Brun J.F. Carrère C. Guillaumont P. de Melo J. Has distance died? Evidence from a panel gravity model.World Bank Econ. Rev. 2005; 19: 99-120Crossref Scopus (185) Google Scholar, 56Melitz, M.J. (2002). The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate Industry Productivity. NBER Working Paper No. 8881.Google Scholar, 57Demidova S. Rodríguez-Clare A. The simple analytics of the Melitz model in a small economy.J. Int. Econ. 2013; 90: 266-272Crossref Scopus (33) Google Scholar, 58Porter M.E. Location, competition, and economic development: local clusters in a global economy.Econ. Dev. Q. 2000; 14: 15-34Crossref Scopus (2398) Google Scholar, 59Bair J. Global capitalism and commodity chains: looking back, going forward.Compet. Chang. 2005; 9: 153-180Crossref Google Scholar, 60Gereffi G. Global value chains in a post-Washington Consensus world.Rev. Int. Polit. Econ. 2014; 21: 9-37Crossref Scopus (450) Google Scholar, 61Gereffi G. Humphrey J. Sturgeon T. The governance of global value chains.Rev. Int. Polit. Econ. 2005; 12: 78-104Crossref Scopus (3675) Google Scholar, 62Coe N.M. Dicken P. Hess M. Global production networks: realizing the potential.J. Econ. Geogr. 2008; 8: 271-295Crossref Scopus (932) Google Scholar, 63Hess M. Governance, value chains and networks: an afterword.Econ. Soc. 2008; 37: 452-459Crossref Google Scholar, 64Mahutga M.C. When do value chains go global? A theory of the spatialization of global value chains.Glob. Netw. 2012; 12: 1-21Crossref Scopus (52) Google Scholar, 65Coe N.M. Geographies of production II: a global production network A-Z.Prog. Hum. Geogr. 2012; 36: 389-402Crossref Scopus (98) Google Scholar,66Larsen R.K. Osbeck M. Dawkins E. Tuhkanen H. Nguyen H. Nugroho A. Gardner T.A. Zulfahm Wolvekamp P. Hybrid governance in agricultural commodity chains: insights from implementation of ‘No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation’ (NDPE) policies in the oil palm industry.J. Clean. Prod. 2018; 183: 544-554Crossref Scopus (30) Google Scholar, 67Borgatti S.P. Mehra A. Brass D.J. Labianca G. Network analysis in the social sciences.Science. 2009; 323: 892-895Crossref PubMed Scopus (2298) Google Scholar, 68Bodin Alexander S.M. Baggio J. Barnes M.L. Berardo R. Cumming G.S. Dee L.E. Fischer A.P. Fischer M. Mancilla Garcia M. et al.Improving network approaches to the study of complex social–ecological interdependencies.Nat. Sustain. 2019; 2: 551-559Crossref Scopus (97) Google Scholar, 69Borgatti S.P. Li X. On the social network analysis in a supply chain context.J. Supply Chain Manag. 2009; 45: 5-22Crossref Scopus (414) Google Scholar, 70Shenton C.R. A Network Theory Approach to the Study of International Commodity Markets. Centre for Environment and Sustainability University of Surrey, 2017http://epubs.surrey.ac.uk/814037/1/thesis_upload_ver.pdfGoogle Scholar, 71Folke C. Resilience: the emergence of a perspective for social–ecological systems analyses.Glob. Environ. Chang. 2006; 16: 253-267Crossref Scopus (4043) Google Scholar, 72Folke C. Biggs R. Norström A.V. Reyers B. Rockström J. Social-ecological resilience and biosphere