Beyond Agriculture: How UNDP's Power Mapping Framework Could Reshape Food System Reforms

The UNDP's Food & Power Initiative argues that transforming food systems requires addressing the political and institutional power dynamics that shape policies, markets, and resource distribution, not just investing in technology or agriculture. Its framework helps governments, development partners, and private-sector stakeholders identify power imbalances, strengthen inclusive governance, reduce implementation risks, and design more effective, equitable, and sustainable food system reforms.

Food system transformation is increasingly being recognized as a governance challenge rather than simply an agricultural or technological one. A new methodology and guidance note developed by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) under its Food & Power Initiative (FPI) argues that many food system reforms fail not because of inadequate technology or funding, but because governments often overlook how political influence, institutional interests and unequal power relationships shape decision-making. The report presents a practical framework to help countries identify who holds influence over food systems, who benefits from existing policies, who may resist change and how reforms can become more inclusive. By identifying nine major power asymmetries, four forms of power, and a four-stage analytical methodology, the guidance offers policymakers, development partners and private-sector stakeholders a roadmap for designing food system reforms that are both technically effective and politically feasible.

Looking Beyond Technology to Understand Food System Challenges

The report argues that decisions on land ownership, agricultural finance, market access, public investment, food processing, trade and environmental regulation shape food systems. These decisions are often influenced by powerful stakeholders, making governance as important as agricultural innovation. It identifies nine power asymmetries grouped into three broad areas: corporate concentration, unequal access to productive resources, and governance inequalities. Large businesses may dominate agricultural inputs, processing, logistics, retail and digital technologies. At the same time, vulnerable groups such as smallholder farmers, women, Indigenous communities, youth and informal workers frequently have limited influence over policies that directly affect their livelihoods.

The guidance also explains that power exists in four interconnected forms. Visible power includes laws, regulations, budgets and formal institutions. Hidden power determines which issues reach government agendas and whose interests receive attention. Invisible power shapes public beliefs, social norms and cultural attitudes that reinforce inequality. Systemic power reflects long-standing political, economic and institutional structures that continue to influence development outcomes. Understanding these different dimensions allows governments to identify why many well-designed reforms struggle during implementation despite strong technical evidence.

A Practical Framework for Better Policy Decisions

To help countries move from analysis to action, the report proposes a four-stage methodology. The process begins with defining the policy challenge, reviewing existing institutions and assembling multidisciplinary teams. The second stage maps stakeholders across governments, producer organizations, civil society, research institutions, financial institutions, development agencies, media and private businesses to understand their interests, influence and relationships. The third stage examines how power is exercised through political authority, financial resources, knowledge, public legitimacy and institutional networks while identifying potential supporters and opponents of reform. The final stage translates these findings into practical strategies such as coalition building, governance reforms, stronger accountability mechanisms, improved public participation and better communication to support long-term implementation.

For governments, this represents a shift from focusing solely on increasing agricultural production toward understanding the political economy that shapes food systems. Countries developing national food security strategies, climate adaptation plans or agricultural investment programmes can use power mapping to anticipate resistance, strengthen coordination across ministries and ensure that reforms benefit vulnerable communities rather than reinforcing existing inequalities. The report also aligns closely with broader development priorities, including the Sustainable Development Goals related to hunger, inequality, responsible production, climate action and effective institutions.

Why Development Partners and Businesses Should Pay Attention

The report carries significant implications for international development organizations, including multilateral development banks, UN agencies and bilateral donors that collectively invest billions of dollars every year in agriculture, rural development and climate resilience. Many programmes face delays or limited impact because political dynamics and stakeholder incentives are insufficiently understood during project design. Integrating power analysis into project preparation can improve risk assessment, strengthen local ownership, identify influential partners and increase the long-term sustainability of development investments.

Private-sector stakeholders also have an important role to play. Agribusinesses, food processors, retailers, financial institutions, digital agriculture companies and investors increasingly operate in markets where governments and consumers expect greater transparency, sustainability and social responsibility. Businesses that engage constructively with governments, producer organizations and local communities can strengthen supply chains, improve market access and reduce regulatory risks. At the same time, companies that rely on concentrated market power or weak governance practices may face greater scrutiny as countries pursue more inclusive food system reforms.

Building More Inclusive and Resilient Food Systems

The report concludes that food system transformation should be viewed as a continuous governance process rather than a one-time policy intervention. Political priorities, market conditions, climate risks and stakeholder relationships constantly evolve, requiring governments to regularly update stakeholder mapping, strengthen institutional accountability and encourage broad public participation. Investing in better data systems, transparent decision-making and stronger collaboration between public institutions, businesses and civil society will be essential for sustaining reforms over the long term.

For policymakers, the guidance offers a practical tool to design reforms that are more likely to succeed because they account for political realities alongside technical evidence. For development partners, it provides a framework for improving project effectiveness and ensuring that investments create lasting social and economic benefits. For the private sector, it highlights the growing importance of responsible business practices, stakeholder engagement and inclusive governance. Ultimately, the report makes a clear case that achieving sustainable, resilient and equitable food systems will depend not only on innovation and investment, but also on understanding who holds power, how decisions are made and how governance can be strengthened to ensure that development benefits are shared more fairly across society.