Asymmetric forks: dilemmas, paradoxes and moral imagination in food sustainability

Abstract

Purpose

The paper suggests moral imagination as an approach to picture sustainable scenarios in the food industry, which are based on knowledge sharing among stakeholders and knowledge management. This can lead to a wider awareness, consequently a deeper understanding and finally more sustainable behaviors and choices in the food sector.

Design/methodology/approach

The research paper analyzes the relevant literature on sustainability, stakeholder theory, knowledge management and moral imagination. It proposes a moral imagination process and provides some cases to clarify its applicability.

Findings

Inter-stakeholder shared knowledge and consequent knowledge management can lead to the projection of more aware sustainable scenarios over time, overcoming a short-sighted or partial vision. The process of moral imagination can be an approach and tool for coping with sustainability-related critical issues, challenges and dilemmas in the food sector.

Research limitations/implications

The article is a research paper, but the suggested process of moral imagination intends to provoke further reasoning and contributions to moral imagination and the stakeholders' role, responsibility and awareness related to sustainability in the food industry.

Practical implications

Even if theoretical, the paper can have well replicable managerial implications and applications in the design of sustainable scenarios in the food sector overcoming the asymmetries and bias. In particular, it is very useful conceiving the choices and outlining the behaviors upon which the firm's actions are based.

Originality/value

The article considers the broad spectrum of sustainability and its wide global reflection as well as the role of all stakeholders without a solely strategic focus and implications.

Citation

Cortese, D. and Murdock, A. (2020), "Asymmetric forks: dilemmas, paradoxes and moral imagination in food sustainability", British Food Journal, Vol. 122 No. 5, pp. 1693-1703. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-06-2019-0398