Keywords: Market Access; Public Procurement; Agroecology; Family Farming

Definition

Programs in which the government operates food procurement to establish stable markets as an important commercialization channel for family farmers. The publicly acquired food may also be used to promote access to healthy food for populations experiencing food insecurity, and to fuel food banks that serve as stabilizing reserves in case of scarcity (e.g.: following the occurrence of extreme climate events and economic shocks).


Rationale

Several smallholders experience difficulties to access procurement markets for their agricultural outputs. A non-exhaustive list of reasons for that are:

  • the distance of their land to commercialization centers,
  • poorly maintained roads,
  • lack of the means to transport their products by themselves, and
  • absence of formal documents being required for sales.

Most of them do not have any savings and hedging mechanisms for their production, which means that unexpected price variations can severely harm their current and future income.

On the other side, several low-income people experience food insecurity and may not have the means to purchase healthy food (e.g: fresh protein and vegetables). Families living in underserved areas, homeless individuals, single mothers, children and adolescents, and elderly people are among the most affected. Many of these are out of the labor force and do not have a regular income. Specifically, the last two mentioned groups are out of the working-age population and often depend on the food that is served at public facilities, such as public school meals, to complement their diets.

Taking into consideration both dysfunctional supply and demand sides, governments may and should act to guarantee stable and proper livelihoods by entering the market as a player, or a mediator of transactions.


Key interventions

Public Food Procurement and Related Capacity Building

Food procurement provides family farmers, fishers, and other rural communities with a guarantee of the sale of their products, which helps with planning their production and likely reduces sales to middlemen, allowing them to increase their profit margins and final income.

The public procurement contracts may set fixed or floor prices that assure the rural producers meet their financial needs. The policies may have eligibility criteria based, for example, on the income of the farmers or the sizes of their properties. Policies can also prioritize women, or other groups experiencing intersecting vulnerabilities.

There may also be eligibility criteria that require compliance with the environmental legislation and the use of sustainable practices. Governments can prioritize acquisitions of organic or ecological food. This is a way to foster both sustainability and healthy diets.

The purchased food is often used to meet the demand of public sector administration. For example, schools and hospitals need to supply meals for students and patients, respectively. Also, military units, university restaurants, prisons, and other public service organisms demand food to serve meals. More importantly, this food can be supplied for the poor and those experiencing food insecurity at facilitated conditions.

Complementary to the procurement, capacity building for smallholders can be implemented. There may be provision of technical assistance, training, and resources to smallholder farmers to improve their ability to meet the quality, quantity, and sustainability standards required by institutional buyers. They may be encouraged to process the food produced and establish small family agro-industries. This includes support for investments in production techniques, machinery, and inputs that enhance cultivation. Additionally, incentives could encourage the creation and strengthening of formal farmer organizations, such as cooperatives and associations.

Pro-Poor Food Pricing

The public administration can also manage to distribute purchased food towards those in need, while giving up profits, and even partially or totally subsidizing the costs.

The food acquired in procurement markets may be supplied at the social assistance network, including popular restaurants, social and solidarity kitchens, food banks, or even kept at the hands of the smallholders for self-consumption. In these cases, it is important to consider the spatial dimension of poverty and place the facilities in strategic areas.

Put together, public procurement and pro-poor mechanisms foster shorter supply chains, strengthening the link between local production and consumption, thereby supporting local food systems, reducing the dependency on global markets, lowering transport costs and the carbon footprint.

Poor and food insecure communities, especially those listed below.

Producers:

  • Family farmers;
  • Pastoralists;
  • Indigenous populations;
  • Communities that are land-locked or living in isolated areas;
  • Pastoralists,
  • Fishers;
  • Forest dwellers.

Consumers:

  • Producers (own-consumption);
  • Families experiencing food insecurity and malnutrition;
  • Women;
  • Children and adolescents;
  • Elderly people;
  • People experiencing homelessness.

Overview

Several studies provide evidence that institutional markets, including public procurement and pro-poor food pricing mechanisms, can have positive impacts on food security and nutrition. Kelly and Swensson (2017) highlight how institutional food procurement can be leveraged to link smallholder farmers to markets. In addition, an extensive study of local public food procurement programmes in Latin America and the Caribbean by Leão et al. (2025) provides robust evidence that, when such programmes are explicitly targeted at smallholder farmers, they can make significant contributions to food security and nutrition, generate employment, and strengthen the resilience of agri-food systems. The study shows that smallholders in Brazil participating in public procurement programmes experienced income increases ranging from approximately 19% to 106%. Furthermore, the evidence suggests that programmes in Guatemala and Honduras generated up to 478 jobs for every million US dollars transacted.


Evidence from Country Examples

Brazil: Since 2003, Brazil has implemented the Food Acquisition Program (Programa de Aquisição de Alimentos – PAA), which creates a structured and guaranteed market for family farmers by allowing the state to purchase food directly from them without competitive bidding and at administratively defined reference prices. According to Sambuichi et al. (2024), the PAA–CDS modality contributed to an average increase of 24.2% in farmers’ gross production income, with the largest gains accruing to the poorest producers. In particular, farmers in the 10th percentile of gross income experienced income increases of 45.9%. Furthermore, evidence presented by Soares et al. (2013) indicates that participation in the PAA was associated with expanded production and technological upgrading: approximately one third of beneficiary farmers increased their cultivated area, while two thirds increased the level of technology used in crop production. Improvements in income, expanded cultivated area, and higher levels of technology facilitated a more efficient division of labour within households, enabling family members to engage in non-agricultural activities and diversify their sources of income.


References
Kelly, S., & Swensson, L. F. J. (2017). Leveraging institutional food procurement for linking small farmers to markets (FAO Agricultural Development Economics Technical Study No. 1). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

Leão, D., Godoy, M., & Rodrigues, M. (2025). Improving food security and nutrition through local public food procurement from smallholder farmers: Latin America and the Caribbean. Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, & World Food Programme.

Sambuichi, R. H. R., Paula, S. D. R., Perin, G., Almeida, A. F. C. S. D., Gualdani, C., & Marques, F. J. (2024). Public food procurement and food security: An assessment of the impacts of the PAA on family farming in Brazil. Desenvolvimento e Meio Ambiente, 63, 197–225.

Soares, F. V., Nehring, R., Schwengber, R. B., Rodrigues, C. G., & Lambais, G. (2013). Structured demand and smallholder farmers in Brazil: The case of PAA and PNAE (IPC-IG Technical Paper). International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth.

  • Budget restrictions;
  • Bureaucratic efficiency. As this policy instrument is based on governments executing purchases and sales, it depends on bureaucratic mechanisms to guarantee transparency and fairness. If the processes are not well-established and shaped, it poses a threat for the functioning of the instrument, either by failing at establishing transparency and fairness, or by making the operations too slow or complicated.;
  • Coordination between different levels of government: as it depends on partnerships with federal entities at the state and municipal level, there are limitations of a political nature, in terms of planning and execution capacity;
  • Well-trained team: the complexity of making national scale programmes operational requires a reasonable coordination capacity from program managers, which implies qualified human resources and technology.
b) contribute to the realization of the right to adequate food in the context of national food security in order to achieve a world free from hunger (SDG targets 2.1 and 2.3), d) Contribute to addressing discrimination against women that leads to poverty, hunger and malnutrition such as differences in the prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity between men and women, absence of women equal rights to economic resources, as well as of access to ownership and control over land and other forms of property, financial services, inheritance and natural resources, in accordance with national laws (SDG targets 5.a1 and 5.a.2), or contribute to recognize and value unpaid care and domestic work through the provision of public services, infrastructure and social protection policies and the promotion of shared responsibility within the household and the family as nationally appropriate (SDG 5.4), e) target smallholder farmers (family farmers, forest dependent groups, fisherfolks, pastoralists) and among them those more likely to be left behind (e.g. women, youth, elderly, indigenous populations, communities which are land-locked or living in isolated areas, pastoralists, fishers, forest dwellers) with a view to increasing their productivity and incomes through secure and equal access to land, other productive resources and inputs, knowledge, financial services, remittances and diaspora contributions, access to credit and markets, including institutional markets, and opportunities for value addition as well as non-farm employment (SDG target 2.3) and promoting rural and territorial development, f) reach out to food consumers vulnerable to food insecurity and malnutrition, with a view of promoting information and facilitating access to healthy diets, including through education, g) foster sustainable and healthy food production systems and implement resilient agricultural practices that increase productivity and production while maintaining ecosystems, including agroecology, agroforestry and payment for environmental services, that strengthen capacity for adaptation to climate change, extreme weather, drought, flooding, and other disasters and that progressively improve land and soil quality and maintain fish stocks (SDG target 2.4), and h) reduce the exposure and vulnerability and increase the resilience of poor and vulnerable populations to climate related-extreme events and social, economic, and environmental shocks and disasters, as well as their capacity to properly respond to these shocks, when they occur (SDG targets 1.5 and 2.4)

SDG 3 - Good health and well-being

  • Target 3.4 - By 2030, reduce by one third premature mortality from non-communicable diseases through prevention and treatment and promote mental health and well-being.

SDG 8 - Decent work and economic growth

  • Target 8.3 - Promote development-oriented policies that support productive activities, decent job creation, entrepreneurship, creativity and innovation, and encourage the formalization and growth of micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises, including through access to financial services.
  • Target 8.4 -  Improve progressively, through 2030, global resource efficiency in consumption and production and endeavour to decouple economic growth from environmental degradation, in accordance with the 10-Year Framework of Programmes on Sustainable Consumption and Production, with developed countries taking the lead.
  • Target 8.5 -  By 2030, achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men, including for young people and persons with disabilities, and equal pay for work of equal value.

SDG 10 - Reduced inequalities

  • Target 10.1 - By 2030, progressively achieve and sustain income growth of the bottom 40 per cent of the population at a rate higher than the national average.
  • Target 10.2 - By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status.
  • Target 10.4 - Adopt policies, especially fiscal, wage and social protection policies, and progressively achieve greater equality.

SDG 12 - Responsible consumption and production

  • Target 12.2 -  By 2030, achieve the sustainable management and efficient use of natural resources.
  • Target 12.3 - By 2030, halve per capita global food waste at the retail and consumer levels and reduce food losses along production and supply chains, including post-harvest losses.
  • Target 12.7 - Promote public procurement practices that are sustainable, in accordance with national policies and priorities.

Country examples