Implementing Collective Impact for Food Systems Change: Reflections and Adaptations from Michigan

Abstract

As Collective Impact (CI) gains popularity across food systems change efforts, few scholars and practitioners have evaluated whether this collaborative social-change framework is well suited to food systems work. We begin to answer this question based on our own experience applying a CI model to support statewide goals established in the Michigan Good Food Charter. Our reflections are based on the project's evaluation findings, internal staff discussions about their CI-based efforts, discussions with other food systems practitioners using CI, and a review of emerging literature where scholars and practitioners evaluate or reflect on facilitating a CI initiative. advocacy, and that, unless intentionally integrated, it has the potential to exacerbate, rather than address, inequities. However, our experience and that of other food systems practitioners also suggest that it is possible to transcend these limitations. We argue that groups expecting to make significant improvements to food systems can turn to CI as one of many social-change models that can guide their work, but only if lead organizations have the capacity to build trust and relationships between stakeholders and if they can thoughtfully integrate strategies for ensuring policy-and equity-based change.

Enhancing governance and strengthening advocacy for policy change of large Collective Impact initiatives

“…One criticism is that the CI approach does not sufficiently focus on advocacy (Flood et al, ) and especially not on advocacy for policy change: “[CI] does not include policy change and systems change as essential and intentional outcomes of the partnership's work” (Wolff, , p. 4). This criticism is echoed by other authors (Hoey et al, ). Yet a policy change is particularly important for avoiding fragmentation of the work, building the collective efforts of various actors and organizations and addressing issues that cannot be addressed through local action alone (Wolff, ).…”

“…CI is presented as a high‐performing structured approach for cross‐sector collaboration to achieve large‐scale social impact (Hanleybrown, Kania, & Kramer, ). The approach has been used in a broad variety of settings and to address a wide range of problems, from poverty reduction to obesity prevention (Amed et al, ; Dipankui, ; Flood, Minkler, Hennessey Lavery, Estrada, & Falbe, ; Garber & Adams, ; Grumbach et al, ; Hoey, Colasanti, Pirog, & Shapiro, ; Smart, ; Thompson & Jocius, ). The CI approach can apply to local, national, and regional/global level initiatives (Hanleybrown et al, ; Patscheke, Barmettler, Herman, Overdyke, & Pfitzer, ).…”

“…Although the CI approach has received an overwhelmingly positive response, it has also been criticized in academic literature and practitioner forums (Christens & Inzeo, ; Flood et al, ; Hoey et al, ; Le, ; Wolff, ). One criticism is that the CI approach does not sufficiently focus on advocacy (Flood et al, ) and especially not on advocacy for policy change: “[CI] does not include policy change and systems change as essential and intentional outcomes of the partnership's work” (Wolff, , p. 4).…”

Tackling Grand Challenges

“…Rather, they must possess the skills to cultivate leaders among those involved. The individuals driving the collective impact process must be able to create spaces where authentic dialogue is encouraged and supported and space for criticism, debate, and negotiation is embraced (Hoey, Colasanti, Pirog, & Fink Shapiro, 2017). Those best suited to apply the collective impact model may be what Bolman & Gallos (2011) refer to as academics leading from the middle.…”

Addressing Complex Societal Problems: Enabling Multiple Dimensions of Proximity to Sustain Partnerships for Collective Impact in Quebec

“…There is great need for multidimensional frameworks to guide diverse stakeholders from government, business, and civil society as they attempt to collaboratively solve complex societal problems [1], such as poverty and developing sustainable food systems [2]. Nonlinear, dynamic, and involving interactions between various structures and stakeholders, these problems require collaborative approaches that need to be sustained over long periods [3].…”