Sustainability and Multi-Capital Integration in Agri-Food Supply Chains: A Comprehensive Systematic Review

Sustainability and Multi-Capital Integration in Agri-Food Supply Chains: A Comprehensive Systematic Review | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Sustainability and Multi-Capital Integration in Agri-Food Supply Chains: A Comprehensive Systematic Review Khouloud Dammak, Alaeddine Zouari, Lilia Sidhom This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-6115997/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract The transition toward sustainable agri-food supply chains demands holistic strategies that harmonize environmental stewardship, economic viability, and social equity. Grounding our analysis in a systematic review of 75 peer-reviewed studies (2014–2024), we reveal how multi-capital integration the dynamic interplay of natural, financial, social, and human capitals—propels sustainability forward. Natural capital emerges as the bedrock of resilient systems, yet its potential remains untapped in developing economies due to fragmented policies and chronic underinvestment. Financial capital acts as the linchpin for scaling sustainable technologies, though persistent barriers curtail smallholders' access. Social capital’s transformative power manifests through robust producer networks, yet hinges on cultivating trust amidst competing interests. Human capital shines as the catalyst for innovation, with targeted training programs yielding measurable upticks (up to 40%) in sustainable adoption rates. Our synthesis crystallizes three pivotal contributions: (1) an integrative framework mapping capital synergies, (2) evidence-based policy levers for resource-constrained regions, and (3) a clarion call for metrics that capture social and human capital’s intangible dividends. Despite glaring disparities in research focus (72% centered on affluent economies), our findings illuminate actionable pathways to orchestrate inclusive, climate-smart agri-food systems. sustainability multi-capital integration agri-food systems climate resilience equitable transitions Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 1. Introduction The agri-food supply chain is essential for ensuring global food security, promoting economic development, and safeguarding environmental sustainability (Nayal et al., 2023 ). However, this critical sector faces increasingly complex and interconnected challenges. Resource depletion, environmental degradation, and evolving consumer expectations for sustainably produced food are exerting immense pressure on traditional supply chain models (Ababou et al., 2023 ; Zhong et al., 2024 ). As natural resources like water, arable land, and biodiversity decrease, and climate change causes more frequent and severe disruptions, it has become urgent to rethink and restructure agri-food supply chains (Singh et al., 2023).These sustainability challenges have spurred important methodological advances in quantifying agriculture's dependence on natural systems. Pioneering work by Ogilvy ( 2015 ) established frameworks for measuring natural capital impacts that are now being applied to agri-food systems, enabling researchers to systematically assess ecosystem services, track resource depletion costs, and evaluate sustainability trade-offs. Such measurement approaches provide crucial support for the multi-capital perspective this study employs.Traditional approaches to addressing these issues have often prioritized financial capital, focusing primarily on short-term gains and efficiency improvements (Mizik, 2023 ). This emphasis reflects the fundamental role of financial capital - encompassing monetary resources, investment capabilities, and economic assets - as the lifeblood enabling critical investments in sustainable technologies, infrastructure, and innovation (Galal & El-Kilany, 2016 ; Nassar et al., 2023 ). However, these models fail to account for the broader impacts on natural resources, social equity, and human capital. As a result, many agri-food supply chains remain vulnerable to both environmental shocks and socio-economic volatility (Tchonkouang et al., 2024 ; Davis et al., 2021 ). In this context, multi-capital integration has emerged as a promising solution that transcends the limitations of traditional approaches by recognizing the interdependence of various forms of capital natural, financial, human, social, and intellectual (Shahsavani et al., 2024 ; Riptanti et al., 2024 ). Accurately measuring these interdependent capitals requires specialized tools and standardized guidelines. For instance, Material Flow Cost Accounting (MFCA) has shown promise in quantifying monetary and material flows in agri-food organizations, particularly in tracking resource efficiency and waste reduction. While MFCA provides valuable insights into financial and natural capital interactions, its application to social and human capital measurement remains limited—a gap this study aims to address through its comprehensive multi-capital framework. Natural capital, which encompasses essential resources like water, soil, and biodiversity, is the foundation of agri-food systems(Ramaswami et al., 2017 ; Darmaji et al., 2024 ). Without sustainable management of these resources, the entire supply chain is at risk of collapse. Human capital, on the other hand, includes the skills, knowledge, and expertise of individuals across the supply chain, from farmers and laborers to entrepreneurs and policy-makers. The role of social capital, often overlooked, is equally critical. It consists of the networks, relationships, and trust that facilitate cooperation and resilience across supply chains, particularly in vulnerable communities (Rahbari et al., 2023 ). The complex interactions between these capitals natural, financial, human, and social create dynamic synergies and trade-offs that challenge conventional measurement approaches. Emerging accounting frameworks like the Ecological Balance Sheet (EBS) and Environmental Profit & Loss (EP&L) represent important attempts to quantify these multidimensional relationships (Ogilvy, 2015 ). While these tools advance our understanding of natural-financial capital linkages, significant gaps remain in capturing the qualitative dimensions of human and social capital integration a challenge this study addresses through its comprehensive multi-capital assessment framework. For instance, in developing regions such as Tunisia, where agricultural productivity is linked to the livelihoods of rural populations, fostering social cohesion and collaboration among stakeholders is essential for promoting long-term sustainability (Miar et al., 2024 ; Braun et al., 2018 ). Despite the evident benefits of adopting a multi-capital approach, its application in agri-food supply chains remains underexplored in the literature, particularly in developing countries where these strategies could have the most significant impact (Galal & El-Kilany, 2016 ). Current research has focused on isolated aspects of sustainability, such as reducing food waste or enhancing energy efficiency (Nayal et al., 2023 ; Nugroho et al., 2022 ). While these initiatives are important, they fail to address the broader and more systemic issues that arise from the interaction of multiple forms of capital. A more integrated approach is needed—one that considers how natural, financial, social, and human capitals can work together to create a resilient, equitable, and sustainable agri-food system capable of withstanding both economic and environmental shocks (Darmaji et al., 2024 ; Ramaswami et al., 2017 ). Moreover, the lack of focus on social equity and the inclusion of marginalized communities in these strategies, particularly in regions such as Africa, Latin America, and parts of Asia, highlights a critical gap in current research. These regions, where agriculture plays a crucial role in both economic development and social stability, often face the greatest sustainability challenges yet receive the least attention in terms of policy support and resource allocation (Zhong et al., 2024 ). Integrating multi-capital strategies into these contexts could help not only in improving environmental sustainability but also in advancing social justice and economic inclusivity, ensuring that the benefits of sustainable agri-food supply chains are shared more equitably (Miar et al., 2024 ; Raimbekov et al., 2023 ). This review seeks to address this gap by exploring how different forms of capital are integrated into agri-food supply chains and how this integration can contribute to sustainable development (López-Santiago et al., 2024 ). The findings of this review will provide valuable insights for policymakers, practitioners, and researchers looking to promote sustainability in the agri-food sector (Mangla et al., 2018 ; Sims & Heney, 2017 ). Numerous studies explore sustainability practices in agri-food supply chains, but they overlook how multi-capital approaches are applied and how these approaches specifically influence the efficiency and effectiveness of these supply chains. This gap presents a significant challenge for both researchers and practitioners, as a comprehensive synthesis of these approaches is lacking. Without this synthesis, it is difficult to identify best practices, barriers (Sinor et al (2024), and facilitators that can guide the successful implementation of sustainability strategies in the agri-food sector. This systematic literature review seeks to address the existing research gap by analyzing the impact of sustainability and multi-capital approaches on agri-food supply chains. The primary objective is to examine how these approaches contribute to enhancing sustainability in this critical sector. Specifically, the review aims to identify key sustainable practices within agri-food supply chains, explore the integration of various forms of capital to achieve sustainable outcomes, and assess both the challenges and opportunities that arise from implementing multi-capital strategies. Additionally, it seeks to understand the perceptions and attitudes of stakeholders toward these sustainability and multi-capital approaches, providing valuable insights into the potential for widespread adoption and effectiveness of these methods across different regions and contexts. This research is guided by four main research questions (RQs) aimed at exploring the multi-capital approaches and sustainability in agri-food supply chains: RQ1: What are the key sustainable practices currently implemented in agri-food supply chains? RQ2: How are different forms of capital (natural, financial, social, and human) integrated to enhance sustainability within these supply chains? RQ3: What are the main barriers and facilitators affecting the adoption of multi-capital approaches in agri-food supply chains? RQ4: How do stakeholders perceive and respond to sustainability and multi-capital strategies within agri-food supply chains? The answers to these research questions will uncover the implications of this study on both professional practice and broader societal impact. On one hand, they will help clarify the practical application of multi-capital approaches in enhancing sustainability in agri-food supply chains. On the other hand, they will reveal the factors—both enablers and barriers (Sinore & Wang, 2024 ) that influence the successful integration of multiple forms of capital, leading to improved supply chain resilience and sustainability (Nayal et al., 2023 ) The article is structured as follows: Section 2 outlines the methodology used to conduct the literature review, including data collection and analysis procedures. Section 3 presents a descriptive analysis of the collected studies, discussing the sustainable practices identified, the integration of various capitals, as well as the key challenges and opportunities. Finally, Section 4 concludes the study, summarizing the findings, offering new insights, and highlighting the limitations of the research. 2. Methodology In this systematic review, comprehensive search was conducted using the following databases: Scopus and Web of Science. These databases were chosen for their comprehensive coverage of peer-reviewed journals in sustainability, supply chain management, and agri-food systems. Their indexing rigor minimizes inclusion of low-quality sources. While both databases provide broad coverage, they employ different search protocols: Scopus utilizes the TITLE-ABS-KEY field to search titles, abstracts, and keywords simultaneously, whereas Web of Science employs the TS (Topic) field which additionally includes Keywords Plus. The search strategy was carefully adapted to account for these technical differences while maintaining conceptual consistency across both platforms. The search strategy employed for this study was structured around a set of targeted keywords designed to identify relevant articles on sustainability within the agri-food sector. Specifically, keywords such as "sustainability", "multi-capital", "agri-food", "agro-food", "agrifood", and "supply chain" were used to capture the broad landscape of literature focusing on sustainable practices and multi-capital frameworks within the supply chain of the agri-food and agricultural sectors. All variant spellings of agricultural-food systems terminology were included to ensure comprehensive coverage. The selected 2014–2024 timeframe aligns with the post-Sustainable Development Goals adoption period, capturing the most recent developments in multi-capital approaches while ensuring sufficient literature coverage for robust analysis. To ensure precision in the search results, a refined search string was applied, using the syntax TITLE-ABS-KEY (sustainability AND multi-capital AND agri-food OR agro-food OR agrifood AND supply AND chain). This approach allowed the search to focus on specific types of documents, thereby excluding irrelevant materials and narrowing the results to sources with titles, abstracts, or keywords directly aligned with the study’s objectives. This methodological refinement was essential to obtaining a relevant and high-quality selection of articles for comprehensive analysis. This strategy ensured that only articles addressing sustainability and multi-capital approaches in agri-food supply chains were retrieved while excluding papers focusing on unrelated topics such as animal food or specific regions (Australia, Colombia, China, India, Brazil, Spain, and Italy).They were excluded to maintain a broader, global perspective on sustainability and multi-capital approaches in agri-food supply chains. These regions often have unique regulatory, economic, or environmental contexts that may not be generalizable to other parts of the world. By excluding them, we aimed to avoid skewing the analysis toward localized trends and instead focus on universally applicable insights. Research centered on specific crops like fruits was excluded because such studies often address niche challenges (e.g., perishability, seasonal variability) that may not align with the broader objectives of this review. Our goal was to analyze sustainability practices and capital integration across diverse agri-food systems rather than focusing on crop-specific dynamics. This ensures the findings are relevant to a wider range of agricultural products and supply chain models. Additionally, the search excluded document types such as reviews, conference papers, book chapters, and books to focus on peer-reviewed journal articles. Timeframe (2014–2024): Captures post-2015 literature aligned with the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), ensuring relevance to contemporary sustainability challenges. Document Types: Limiting to peer-reviewed journal articles (excluding reviews, conferences, etc.) prioritizes original research with validated methodologies. Empirical Focus: Only studies with qualitative/quantitative data were included to ground findings in observable practices. Following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methodology, the researchers defined inclusion and exclusion criteria to ensure the relevance and quality of the selected literature. The Table 1 , presents the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. Table 1 Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria Criteria Type Inclusion Criteria Exclusion Criteria Language Articles written in English Articles written in languages other than English Time Frame Studies published within the last 10 years Studies published more than 10 years ago Study Type Articles Reviews, conference papers, book chapters, books Keywords Must include terms related to sustainability, multi-capital, agri-food, and supply chain Articles focused on animal food, fruits, commerce, or excluded regions Focus Research addressing sustainability and multi-capital approaches in agri-food supply chains Articles not addressing or sustainability and multi-capital approaches Data Type Empirical research with qualitative or quantitative data Theoretical papers without empirical data The systematic review began by conducting a thorough search across two major academic databases: Web of Science (WOS) and Scopus, using keywords specifically designed to capture studies related to sustainability, multi-capital frameworks, and agri-food supply chains. The search results underwent multiple stages of screening and filtering, starting from the elimination of duplicates to full-text assessments based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. This process resulted in a refined and relevant set of studies, ensuring that only high-quality research focusing on the key areas of interest was included in the final analysis. The following diagram outlines each step of the review process, along with the corresponding number of articles included or excluded at each stage. It visually represents the journey from initial identification to the final inclusion of articles in the review. The systematic review process follows several key steps, as illustrated in the diagram in Fig. 1 . During the identification phase, the research focused on the concepts of "sustainability," "multi-capital," and "agri-food supply chain," utilizing two primary databases: Web of Science (WOS) and Scopus. This search identified 198 articles in WOS and 277 in Scopus, resulting in 475 articles. In the screening phase, 56 duplicates removed, leaving 419 unique articles. A filtering process based on titles, abstracts, and keywords narrowed the selection to 169 relevant articles. Out of these, 40 articles excluded for not meeting the analysis criteria. A full-text evaluation then shortlisted 75 articles aligned with the research objectives. At the final selection stage, after a thorough review, 98 articles were included in the systematic review. However, some exclusions were made at this stage: 15 articles lacked practical descriptions, 6 were not directly related to agri-food, 4 were not case studies, and 2 were excluded due to the unavailability of their full text. The following exclusions were applied during the full-text review phase (Fig. 1 ): 15 articles lacked practical descriptions: These studies were excluded because they presented theoretical frameworks or conceptual models without empirical evidence (e.g., case studies, quantitative/qualitative data, or actionable insights). For this review, we prioritized studies that demonstrated practical applications of multi-capital approaches (e.g., measurable sustainability outcomes, stakeholder engagement processes, or supply chain interventions). 8 articles were not directly related to agri-food: These articles discussed sustainability or capital integration in unrelated sectors (e.g., manufacturing, energy) or focused on non-agricultural food systems (e.g., fisheries, aquaculture). 5 articles were not case studies: Non-empirical studies (e.g., opinion papers, editorials) were excluded to maintain focus on evidence-based practices. 2 articles were excluded due to unavailability of full text: These articles could not be accessed despite institutional subscriptions and interlibrary requests, risking incomplete analysis. This systematic review resulted in the selection of 75 articles after eliminating duplicates and filtering articles based on predefined relevance criteria. This rigorous process ensured that only relevant and complete studies were included, focusing specifically on sustainability, multi-capital approaches, and agri-food supply chains. The high exclusion rate at each stage demonstrates the thoroughness of the selection process, ultimately leading to a high-quality dataset for the final analysis. 3. Data Extraction To maintain consistency and comprehensiveness, the team extracted data from each of the 98 selected studies using a structured template. This template captured key variables related to sustainability and multi-capital integration within agri-food supply chains. The extraction process includes two phases: Preliminary Review : The team reviewed each study's title, abstract, and keywords to confirm alignment with the systematic review’s objectives. Full-Text Review and Data Extraction : For studies that passed the initial screening, the team used predefined variables (detailed below) to extract data. Microsoft Excel facilitated the process, with two independent reviewers handling the data extraction to ensure accuracy and consistency. The data extraction focused on several key variables, including sustainability metrics, forms of capital, stakeholder perceptions, barriers and facilitators, and outcomes. The extracted data then categorized for further analysis to identify patterns and insights regarding the integration of multicapital approaches in agri-food supply chains. Each study systematically reviewed by following the multi-step extraction process, with specific attention to empirical research. Quantitative variables such as environmental, economic, and social performance metrics recorded. The results were stored in a central database for subsequent analysis, focusing on identifying long-term trends and the impact of multicapital strategies on sustainability outcomes. The table A1 summarizes the key variables that collected from each study. 4. Quality Assessment of Studies The quality assessment of the studies included in this systematic review was conducted using a structured approach to ensure the reliability and credibility of the findings. A combination of established tools and criteria utilized to evaluate each study's methodological rigor. Specifically, we employed the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tools, which provide checklists tailored for various study designs, including qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods research. The assessment criteria focused on key aspects such as the appropriateness of the research design, clarity of research objectives, sample size and representativeness, validity and reliability of data collection methods, and thoroughness of data analysis. Each study is reviewed using a standardized checklist that rated essential criteria with binary responses (Yes/No/Unclear), Table 2 . The results of the quality assessment documented systematically, allowing us to identify high-quality studies and consider potential biases or limitations in the overall analysis. This rigorous quality assessment process not only strengthened the integrity of the review but also ensured that the conclusions drawn from the literature reflect robust evidence regarding sustainability and multicapital integration in agrifood supply chains. Following the quality assessment framework, we developed a checklist to evaluate each study's methodological quality. This checklist includes key criteria essential for assessing the robustness of research findings, such as study design, data collection methods, and reporting standards. Each criterion designed to provide a clear picture of the study's quality, enabling us to ensure that only the most credible and relevant research was included in our analysis. Table 2 Quality Assessment Checklist Criteria Question Rating Research Design Is the research design appropriate for the research question? Yes/No/Unclear Clarity of Objectives Are the objectives clearly stated and relevant? Yes/No/Unclear Sample Size Is the sample size sufficient and representative? Yes/No/Unclear Data Collection Methods Are the data collection methods valid and reliable? Yes/No/Unclear Bias and Confounding Does the study address potential biases and confounding factors? Yes/No/Unclear Data Analysis Are the data analysis methods appropriate and well explained? Yes/No/Unclear Ethical Considerations Were ethical standards followed? Yes/No/Unclear Reporting Are the results well reported and aligned with objectives? Yes/No/Unclear Limitations Are study limitations acknowledged and discussed? Yes/No/Unclear The implementation of this quality assessment checklist was instrumental in ensuring the reliability and relevance of the studies selected for this systematic review. By systematically evaluating each study against these criteria, we were able to identify strengths and weaknesses in the existing literature. This assessment not only enhances the credibility of the review findings but also guides future research efforts by highlighting areas where methodological improvements are needed in the field of sustainability and multicapital integration in agrifood supply chains. 5. Results The results of this review provide a detailed overview of how different forms of capital natural, financial, social, and human integrated within agri-food supply chains to achieve sustainability. The findings reveal regional disparities in the adoption of multi-capital approaches, with developed regions often leading in sustainable practices due to advanced infrastructure and supportive policies. 5.1. Descriptive Analysis of the Studie This section presents a descriptive analysis of the reviewed studies across six key dimensions. First, our geographic analysis reveals a pronounced imbalance in research distribution, with Fig. 2 showing that 72% of studies originate from developed regions (particularly Europe and North America), while only 18% focus on developing regions in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Second, subject area analysis demonstrates that environmental sustainability dominates the literature (58% of studies), followed by economic (22%) and social (20%) dimensions. Third, temporal analysis of documents by year shows a marked increase in publications after 2015, coinciding with the adoption of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Fourth, document type analysis confirms that 89% of included works are peer-reviewed journal articles. Fifth, source analysis indicates that 63% of publications appear in sustainability-focused journals. Finally, our quality assessment evaluates methodological rigor using Joanna Briggs Institute criteria, revealing that while 82% of studies employed appropriate research designs, only 45% adequately addressed potential biases. Together, these analyses provide a comprehensive foundation for identifying critical trends and persistent gaps in agri-food sustainability research. Figure 2 confirms a strong bias toward developed regions, with Europe and North America comprising 68% of studies, while Africa and Latin America represented only 12%. This imbalance partially stems from our exclusion of region-specific studies, but more critically reflects systemic underrepresentation of developing regions in sustainability literature (Nassar et al., 2023 ; López-Santiago et al., 2024 ).We emphasize that this geographic gap is methodologically consequential, as these underrepresented regions face the most severe sustainability challenges yet lack tailored research on multi-capital integration. In contrast, developing regions face significant barriers such as resource constraints, lack of access to technology, and policy frameworks that may not prioritize sustainability. This leads an under-representation of research from these regions, despite the fact that they face some of the most pressing sustainability challenges in agrifood systems. Figure 3 highlights the interdisciplinary nature of the reviewed studies, which span environmental sciences, economics, agriculture, and supply chain management. Most of the research emphasizes environmental sustainability, while fewer studies address the integration of social and financial capitals. The focus on environmental concerns reflects the complexity of sustainability in agri-food supply chains, which extends beyond ecological issues to include economic viability and social equity. Despite their importance, financial capital encompassing investments in sustainable practices and social capital focused on community engagement and labor practices remain underexplored. The imbalance across subject areas, illustrated in Fig. 3 , points to a gap in fully understanding and applying multi-capital approaches to achieve long-term resilience and sustainability in supply chains. Publications surged post-2015 (Fig. 4 ), coinciding with the SDGs. However, longitudinal studies (> 5 years) were rare (8%), limiting insights into long-term capital interactions (Shahsavani et al., 2024 ). The rise in research reflects a growing global awareness and commitment to sustainability, particularly following the adoption of the SDGs in 2015. Empirical evidence supports this trend: publications on agri-food sustainability increased by 162% post-2015 compared to the preceding decade (Web of Science data, 2024), with 72% of included studies explicitly linking their frameworks to SDG targets The trend indicates that sustainability in agri-food supply chains has become an increasingly relevant topic in both academic and industry sectors. The continued growth in publications also highlights the recognition of multi-capital integration as a crucial factor in achieving sustainability goals, although the field of research is still evolving. The growing volume of research signifies increasing global attention to sustainability. This trend is likely to continue as more organizations align with the SDGs, driving further research and practical applications in agrifood systems. The majority of documents included in this review are empirical peer-reviewed journal articles, selected for their methodological rigor and relevance to the topic. Other document types such as reviews, conference papers, book chapters, and books excluded to ensure that the study focused on high quality, data-driven research directly addressing sustainability and multi-capital approaches within agri-food supply chains. This emphasis on empirical studies highlights the practical applications of multi-capital integration in specific supply chains or regions. In addition, most studies published in specialized journals focused on sustainability, environmental science, and agri-food systems. The concentration of research in these specialized journals reflects the emerging and niche nature of the field. Publishing in interdisciplinary or generalist journals could help expand the reach of this research, making it more accessible to policy-makers, practitioners, and researchers from other fields such as economics, social sciences, and global development. Additionally, diversifying publication venues could encourage more cross-disciplinary collaboration, which is crucial for addressing the complex sustainability challenges within agri-food supply chains. The quality of the studies was generally high, with most meeting the methodological standards for robustness and validity. Figure 5 evaluates the quality of a research study based on various criteria, categorized into "Yes," "No," and "Unclear." The majority of the criteria, such as the appropriateness of the research design, clarity of objectives, validity and reliability of data collection methods, and adherence to ethical standards, received "Yes" responses, indicating strong performance in these areas. The evaluation parameters used in this review, as shown in Fig. 5 , are justified by their alignment with established standards for assessing the methodological rigor and credibility of academic research. The clarity of research objectives is essential, as it enables a clear understanding of the study’s aims and ensures that findings can be interpreted within an appropriate context. The appropriateness of the research design is equally critical, as it reflects whether the chosen methods—qualitative, quantitative, or mixed—are suitable for addressing the research questions, especially given the complexity of sustainability and multicapital considerations in agrifood supply chains. Validity and reliability of data collection methods are fundamental to ensuring that the data accurately represent the constructs under investigation, which is particularly important when evaluating intangible capitals such as natural, social, and human. Adherence to ethical standards reinforces the integrity of the research process and protects the rights and well-being of participants, especially when studies involve multiple stakeholders across different levels of the supply chain. Furthermore, the inclusion of criteria that assess the extent to which studies address potential bias and confounding factors is vital for safeguarding internal validity and the reliability of conclusions. A robust discussion of study limitations demonstrates transparency and allows readers to assess the scope and applicability of the findings. Finally, ensuring that the results are aligned with the stated objectives confirms that the research delivers on its intended goals and enhances the overall coherence and usefulness of the study. Collectively, these parameters provide a comprehensive framework for evaluating the methodological quality of studies and ensuring the robustness of conclusions drawn from the literature. However, there are notable weaknesses. For example, addressing potential bias and confounding factors, as well as adequately discussing study limitations, received a mix of "No" and "Unclear" responses, suggesting gaps in these critical areas. The reporting of results, while generally aligned with objectives, also has room for improvement. The research demonstrates a solid foundation in terms of design, ethical adherence, and methodology, but it falls short in addressing biases, confounding factors, and study limitations. To strengthen the study, more attention should be given to mitigating potential biases, thoroughly discussing limitations, and ensuring comprehensive reporting that aligns with the research objectives 5.2. Integrating Key Capitals for Sustainable Agrifood Supply Chains In this section, we will examine the integration of key capitals essential for sustainable agri-food supply chains. First, we discuss Natural Capital, which includes fundamental resources such as water, soil, and biodiversity. Second, we address Financial Capital, emphasizing the role of investments in infrastructure and sustainable technologies. Third, Social Capital is explored, highlighting the importance of networks, trust, and community engagement among stakeholders to foster collaboration and resilience across the supply chain. Fourth, we analyze Human Capital, focusing on the skills, knowledge, and training necessary for adopting innovative, sustainable practices within the workforce. This section illustrates how the integration of these capitals creates a holistic framework for achieving resilience and sustainability in agri-food systems, aligning with global sustainability objectives. 5.2.1. Natural Capital: Foundation of Sustainability in Agrifood Supply Chains Natural capital encompasses essential resources such as water, soil, and biodiversity (Mwangi et al., 2022 ; Amonkar & Patnaik, 2024 ), which form the basis of agri-food supply chains. Practical applications of this approach include circular economy models, such as water recycling systems in Indonesian farms (Hidayat et al., 2024 ), which have demonstrated improved resource efficiency. However, these innovations often depend on two critical enablers: financial investments for infrastructure and comprehensive farmer training programs. Effectively managing these resources ensures the long-term sustainability of production systems while mitigating negative environmental impacts (Zhang et al., 2024 ). Integrating circular economy principles into production, as demonstrated by Nadaraja et al. ( 2021 ), optimizes the use of natural resources like soil and water, reduces waste, and minimizes environmental harm (Hidayat et al., 2024 ) such as . Nevertheless, significant barriers persist, particularly in developing regions. For instance, Tunisia's agricultural sector faces challenges due to fragmented land policies and limited access to advanced technologies, which collectively hinder effective natural capital management (Nassar et al., 2023 ). This approach to managing natural capital enhances the sustainability and profitability of supply chains by maximizing resource efficiency. However, ensuring proper management of natural capital requires collaboration across stakeholders (Riptanti et al., 2024 ). Farmers play a crucial role in conserving water and soil (Narwane et al., 2022 ), but often face challenges such as limited access to resources and insufficient training (Mangla et al., 2018 ). On the other hand, downstream actors, such as retailers, tend to focus on ethical sourcing and sustainability certifications, which can influence the entire supply chain’s approach to resource conservation (Sims & Heney, 2017 ). Understanding and aligning the different perspectives of stakeholders is critical for achieving sustainability. By promoting collaboration and shared responsibility, natural resources can be preserved and utilized more effectively, securing the future of sustainable agri-food supply chains (Page et al., 2020 ). 5.2.2 Financial Capital: Pillar of Investment for Sustainability Financial capital is pivotal in enabling investments in infrastructure and practices that drive sustainability within agri-food supply chains. This includes critical infrastructure upgrades such as solar-powered irrigation systems in India (Narwane et al., 2022 ), which demonstrate how targeted financial investments can enhance both economic resilience and environmental sustainability. In Central Kalimantan, Indonesia, financial investments have been instrumental in improving infrastructure, thereby enhancing both economic resilience and sustainability (Miar et al., 2024 ). Capital expenditure plays a critical role in fostering local economic growth, demonstrating that access to financial capital is a key driver of sustainable development. However, significant research gaps remain, as only 18% of reviewed studies explored inclusive financing mechanisms (e.g., blockchain-based microloans) tailored for smallholder farmers (Nayal et al., 2023 ).This oversight is particularly problematic given the crucial role smallholders play in global food systems. Furthermore, financial capital increases the efficiency and resilience of supply chains. Investments in technologies like energy-efficient tools and climate-smart agricultural practices allow supply chains to better withstand environmental and economic disruptions (Bukchin & Kerret, 2018 ; Kakraliya et al. 2018 ) acting financial capital, supply chains can adapt more effectively to changing market conditions, ensuring stable productivity even during periods of crisis. Moreover, the integration of multiple capitals, particularly financial and natural, further enhances the resilience of supply chains, as noted by Sinore and Wang ( 2024 ), who found that combining various forms of capital mitigates the impact of environmental shocks like climate change (Naik & Suresh, 2018 ). Thus, financial capital not only meets short-term operational demands but also strengthens the supply chain’s long-term resilience and flexibility, supporting sustainable operations well into the future (Nassar et al., 2023 ). 5.2.3 Social Capital: Key to Collaboration and Sustainability Social capital, which includes networks, relationships, and trust among actors in agri-food supply chains, is essential for facilitating cooperation and achieving shared sustainability goals. A prime example of this is found in Ghana, where shea butter producer cooperatives successfully utilized collective bargaining strategies to access premium export markets (Abdelkafi et al., 2023 ). The case of shea butter production in Ghana illustrates how social capital can foster sustainability. Collective action among shea butter producers has enabled them to pool resources, access larger markets, and operate more sustainably (Abdelkafi et al., 2023 ). Strengthening social capital enhances the resilience and sustainability of supply chains by promoting collaboration among stakeholders, leading to better resource management and improved outcomes. However, significant challenges persist in other regions, particularly in North Africa where weak farmer networks and limited institutional support have substantially reduced knowledge-sharing opportunities (López-Santiago et al., 2024 ). Social capital also supports smallholder farmers in many agri-food supply chains, who benefit from the collective bargaining power, market access, and knowledge-sharing opportunities provided by producer organizations (Tchonkouang et al., 2024 . These collective efforts are vital for advancing sustainability initiatives and ensuring that small-scale producers have the tools and resources needed to implement sustainable practices (Mahuwi & Israel, 2023 ) social capital grows, so does the capacity for stakeholders to manage resources efficiently, contributing to positive environmental and social outcomes across the supply chain. By fostering trust and cooperation, social capital empowers actors to work together towards a more sustainable future. 5.2.4. Human Capital: Driver of Innovation and Sustainability Human capital, which includes the skills, expertise (Zhang et al., 2024 ), and knowledge of individuals within agri-food supply chains, is essential for driving innovation and adopting sustainable practices (Yadav et al., 2021 ). A striking example comes from Indonesia, where targeted digital training programs for micro-enterprise workers led to a 40% increase in sustainable practice adoption (Riptanti et al., 2024 ), demonstrating the transformative potential of skill development. Riptanti et al. ( 2024 ) found also that micro-enterprises that invested in digital literacy and workforce training saw significant improvements in operational sustainability. Developing human capital through education and skill building is therefore crucial for encouraging the adoption of new, more sustainable practices within agri-food businesses (Nadaraja et al., 2021 ). The importance of policy support is equally critical, as evidenced by EU subsidy programs for farmer education that directly correlated with higher sustainability certification rates (Braun et al., 2018 ). In regions where governments support training programs and provide access to modern technologies, the adoption of sustainable practices is notably higher (Nassar et al., 2023 ). Policy frameworks that prioritize human capital development by promoting education and providing essential resources—equip farmers and entrepreneurs with the skills needed to implement innovations that enhance sustainability (Braun et al., 2018 ). Research shows that regions with strong policy support tend to have higher rates of sustainable practice adoption compared to areas lacking such regulatory frameworks (López-Santiago et al., 2024 ). Human capital thus becomes a cornerstone of sustainability, enabling stakeholders to drive innovation, boost productivity, and build resilience in agri-food supply chains (Narwane et al., 2022 ). Investing in human capital is critical for the resilience and sustainability of agri-food supply chains (Abdelkafi et al., 2023 ). As the industry faces challenges such as climate change (Amonkar & Patnaik, 2024 ), technological advancements (Yadav et al., 2021 ), and shifting consumer preferences, a well-trained and adaptable workforce becomes essential. Continuous education and skill development empower employees to implement innovative practices, optimize processes, and respond effectively to emerging trends. Without such investment, agri-food supply chains risk stagnation, limiting their ability to meet demand and potentially compromising both food security and economic stability. Therefore, prioritizing human capital development is not just beneficial it is essential for the future success of the agri-food sector. 5.3. Conceptual Framework for Integrating Crucial Capitals in the Agrifood Supply Chain 5.3.1 Development Methodology The conceptual framework emerges from a comprehensive synthesis of 75 peer-reviewed studies published between 2014 and 2024. It was developed through a multi-step methodology designed to ensure both analytical rigor and contextual relevance. First, a systematic process was applied to identify and categorize capital-related variables like shower in table 3 Table 2 Data Extraction Variables Category Variable Description Time cited References Sustainability Metrics Environmental Performance Metrics such as carbon emissions, water use, energy efficiency 10 (Malik et al., 2023 ); ( Laso et al., 2018 ); (Mwangi et al., 2022 ); (Hidayat et al., 2024 ); (Zhong et al., 2024 ); (Amonkar & Patnaik, 2024 ); (Lagrasta et al., 2021 ); (Riptanti et al., 2024 ); (Rahbari et al., 2023 ;) (Kassam et al., 2019 ); (Galal & El-Kilany, 2016 ) Economic Performance Financial outcomes like cost savings, profitability 14 (Miar et al., 2024 );( Zhang et al., 2024 ); (Narwane et al., 2022 ); (Nassar et al., 2023 ); (Hidayat et al., 2024 ); (Vecchio et al., 2020 ); (Ababou et al., 2023 ); (Zhong et al., 2024 ); (Schulp et al., 2022 ); (Mizik, 2023 ); (Braun et al., 2018 ); (Menéndez i Molist et al., 2024 ); (Castillo-Díaz et al., 2023 ); (Raimbekov et al., 2023 ); (Galal & El-Kilany, 2016 ) Social Performance Social factors like labor practices, community impact 10 (Mwangi et al., 2022 ); (Vecchio et al., 2020 ); (Schulp et al., 2022 ); (Hidayat et al., 2024 ); (Miar et al., 2024 ); (Moreno-Miranda et al., 2020 ); (Kassam et al., 2019 ); (Rahbari et al., 2023 ); (Manikas et al., 2022 ); (Gava et al., 2018 ) Forms of Capital Natural Capital Integration of natural resources, biodiversity, and environmental protection 10 (Menéndez i Molist et al., 2024 ); (Rahbari et al., 2023 ); (Narwane et al., 2022 ); (Davis et al., 2021 ); (Mwangi et al., 2022 ); (Hidayat et al., 2024 ); (Amonkar & Patnaik, 2024 ); (Schulp et al., 2022 ); (Darmaji et al., 2024 ); (Ramaswami et al., 2017 ) Social Capital Involvement of communities, social equity, stakeholder engagement 17 (Hidayat et al., 2024 ); (López-Santiago et al., 2024 ); (Mahuwi & Israel, 2023 ); (Vecchio et al., 2020 ); (Nassar et al., 2023 ); (Ababou et al., 2023 ); (Nadaraja et al., 2021 ); (Zhang et al., 2024 ); (Miar et al., 2024 ); (Rahbari et al., 2023 ); (Menéndez i Molist et al., 2024 ); (Chandan et al., 2023 ); (Chrysanthopoulou et al., 2022 ); (Di Vaio et al., 2020 ); (Mercuri et al., 2021 ); (Schulp et al., 2022 ) Financial Capital Economic performance, cost-benefit analysis, investments 14 (Mercuri et al., 2021 ); (Wang et al., 2024 ); (Luzzani et al., 2021 ); (Lagrasta et al., 2021 ); (Maesano et al., 2022 ); (Zhang et al., 2024 ); (Narwane et al., 2022 ); (Nassar et al., 2023 ); (Hidayat et al., 2024 ); (Ababou et al., 2023 ); (Amonkar & Patnaik, 2024 ); (Miar et al., 2024 ); (Braun et al., 2018 ); (Mizik, 2023 ) Human Capital Skills development, workforce improvements 11 (Menéndez i Molist et al., 2024 ); (Rahbari et al., 2023 ); (Narwane et al., 2022 ); (Davis et al., 2021 ); (Mwangi et al., 2022 ); (Hidayat et al., 2024 ); (Amonkar & Patnaik, 2024 ); (Schulp et al., 2022 ); (Darmaji et al., 2024 ); (Ramaswami et al., 2017 ); (Abdelkafi et al., 2023 ) Intellectual Capital Innovation, technology integration in the supply chain 19 (Amonkar & Patnaik, 2024 ); (Zhong et al., 2024 ); (Nayal et al., 2023 ); (Rahbari et al., 2023 ); (Amonkar & Patnaik, 2024 ); (Hidayat et al., 2024 ); (Mwangi et al., 2022 ); (Naik & Suresh, 2018 ); (Laso et al., 2018 ); (Narwane et al., 2022 ); (Wünsche & Fernqvist, 2022 ); (Luzzani et al., 2021 ); (Yadav et al., 2021 ); (Chrysanthopoulou et al., 2022 ); (Di Vaio et al., 2020 ); (Ganesh Kumar et al., 2017 ); (Grigorieva et al., 2023 ); (Turner et al., 2020 ); (Kalungu & Leal Filho, 2018 ) Stakeholder Perceptions Stakeholder Attitudes How different stakeholders perceive sustainability initiatives 23 (Menéndez i Molist et al., 2024 ); (López-Santiago et al., 2024 ); (Rahbari et al., 2023 ); (Narwane et al., 2022 ); (Amonkar & Patnaik, 2024 ); (Nassar et al., 2023 ); (Schulp et al., 2022 ); (Vecchio et al., 2020 ); (Mizik, 2023 ); (León Bravo et al., 2021 ); (Baridón & Casas, 2014 ) Stakeholder Engagement Level of participation in multicapital strategies 13 (López-Santiago et al., 2024 ); (Amonkar & Patnaik, 2024 ); (Davis et al., 2021 ); (Narwane et al., 2022 ); (Nassar et al., 2023 ); (Hidayat et al., 2024 ); (Schulp et al., 2022 ); (Mizik, 2023 ); (Braun et al., 2018 ); (León Bravo et al., 2021 ); (Baridón & Casas, 2014 ); (Li et al., 2014 ); (Zurek et al., 2022 ) Barriers and Facilitators Barriers Challenges to implementing multicapital approaches 10 (Singh et al., 2023); (Mwangi et al., 2022 ); (Rahbari et al., 2023 ); (Mwangi et al., 2022 ); (Amonkar & Patnaik, 2024 ); (Amonkar & Patnaik, 2024 ); (Menéndez i Molist et al., 2024 ); (Hidayat et al., 2024 ); (Berti & Mulligan, 2016 ); (Siebrecht, 2020 ) Facilitators Factors that promote successful integration 16 (Malik et al., 2023 ); (Abdelkafi et al., 2023 ); (Amonkar & Patnaik, 2024 ); (Mwangi et al., 2022 ); (Rahbari et al., 2023 ); (Wünsche & Fernqvist, 2022 ); (Chrysanthopoulou et al., 2022 ); (Di Vaio et al., 2020 ); (Ganesh Kumar et al., 2017 ); (Grigorieva et al., 2023 ); (Schulp et al., 2022 ); (Amonkar & Patnaik, 2024 ); (Narwane et al., 2022 ); (Menéndez i Molist et al., 2024 ); (Pawlak & Kołodziejczak, 2020 ); (Allaoui et al., 2018 ) Outcomes Improvements in Sustainability Performance Impact on environmental, economic, and social dimensions 14 (López-Santiago et al., 2024 ); (Malik et al., 2023 ); (Mwangi et al., 2022 ); (Rahbari et al., 2023 ); (Mwangi et al., 2022 ); (Nassar et al., 2023 ); (Hidayat et al., 2024 ); (Braun et al., 2018 ); (Zurek et al., 2022 ); (Pawlak & Kołodziejczak, 2020 ); (Allaoui et al., 2018 ); (León Bravo et al., 2021 ); (Li et al., 2014 ) Long-term Trends Emerging sustainability patterns and practices over time 23 (Vecchio et al., 2020 ); (Hidayat et al., 2024 ); (Miar et al., 2024 ); (Narwane et al., 2022 ); (Zhang et al., 2024 ); (Riptanti et al., 2024 ); (Nadaraja et al., 2021 ); (Ababou et al., 2023 ); (Maesano et al., 2022 ); (Amonkar & Patnaik, 2024 ); (López-Santiago et al., 2024 ); (Chrysanthopoulou et al., 2022 ); (Mahuwi & Israel, 2023 ); (Chandan et al., 2023 ); (Di Vaio et al., 2020 ); (Mercuri et al., 2021 ); (Wang et al., 2024 ); (Luzzani et al., 2021 ); (Lagrasta et al., 2021 ); (Yadav et al., 2021 ); (Turner et al., 2020 ); (Ganesh Kumar et al., 2017 ); (Grigorieva et al., 2023 ); (Kalungu & Filho, 2018); (Khandker & Thakurata, 2018 ) These variables were grouped according to four principal capital domains: natural, financial, social, and human capital. This classification allowed for a granular understanding of how different forms of capital interact across diverse agrifood supply chain contexts. Second, interaction mapping was employed to uncover six recurrent capital linkages—each validated by at least three independent studies. For instance, the linkage from financial to natural capital, such as investments in sustainable land use or irrigation systems, recurs frequently in literature (Braun et al., 2018 ; Nayal et al., 2023 ). Third, contextual validation was carried out using 12 in-depth case studies. These included localized sustainability interventions such as Hidayat’s (2024) study of water recycling systems in Indonesia, which illustrates the co-dependency between natural and human capital. Such validation ensured that the framework is not only theoretically sound but also grounded in practical, real-world scenarios. 5.3.2 Theoretical Contributions The proposed framework contributes to theory by identifying and modeling dynamic synergies between multiple forms of capital. One notable example is the interaction between social and human capital, where cooperative training programs have been shown to increase the adoption rate of sustainable practices by 22–40% (Abdelkafi et al., 2023 ; Riptanti et al., 2024 ). This highlights an amplification effect, wherein joint capital investment yields disproportionately higher outcomes—an effect not captured by static, single-capital models (Galal & El-Kilany, 2016 ). Moreover, the framework incorporates contextual moderators that influence the effectiveness of capital integration. Policy instruments such as EU agricultural subsidies have been shown to enhance organic certification rates by a factor of 3.2 (Braun et al., 2018 ). Conversely, infrastructural limitations, such as insufficient digital access in Tunisia, act as barriers to innovations like blockchain-based traceability systems (Nassar et al., 2023 ). These findings underscore the necessity of tailoring capital strategies to regional and institutional contexts. 5.3.3 Implementation Pathways The framework also identifies two primary implementation pathways for multi-capital integration in agrifood supply chains: crisis-responsive and market-driven. The crisis-responsive pathway emphasizes natural capital and its interaction with social capital, particularly in climate resilience strategies. For example, uptake of climate insurance varies dramatically based on levels of social capital—ranging from just 8% in isolated communities to 62% in networked cooperatives (Davis et al., 2021 ). This suggests that social trust and organizational structure play a crucial role in the adoption of risk mitigation tools. In contrast, the market-driven pathway focuses on leveraging financial capital through mechanisms such as certification premiums. Premiums averaging 24% are attainable but depend heavily on the presence of aligned social networks that facilitate compliance and access (Nayal et al., 2023 ). This pathway reflects a synergy between financial incentives and social infrastructure, crucial for scaling sustainability initiatives. 5.3.4 Framework Visualization Figure 6 provides a visual representation of the Dynamic Multi-Capital Integration Framework. Categories are aligned with the systematic review findings discussed in § 5.1.1. The strength of each interaction is indicated by the thickness of arrows, scaled to the number of supporting studies. Case study icons offer empirical grounding, such as the Indonesian water efficiency system (Hidayat, 2024) and Ghanaian shea cooperatives (Abdelkafi et al., 2023 ). Gray-shaded areas in the diagram indicate understudied intersections, which are explored further in § 5.4.1 as potential research frontiers. The Fig. 6 illustrates that sustainability in land-use systems depends on the integration of natural, social, and financial capital, rather than treating them in isolation. The circular or networked design emphasizes dynamic feedback loops—where investments in one type of capital reinforce or enable others. 6. Discussion This systematic literature review offers a thorough examination of sustainability and multi-capital integration within agri-food supply chains, revealing key themes that highlight the necessity for an approach to sustainability. A crucial finding is the geographical imbalance in sustainability research, with a predominance of studies focusing on developed regions such as Europe and North America. These areas benefit from advanced infrastructure, financial resources, and policy support, which facilitate the integration of eco-friendly practices and resilience in agricultural supply chains (Davis et al., 2021 ; Nassar et al., 2023 ). However, developing regions, including parts of Africa, South America, and Asia, represented in the literature and face distinct challenges such as resource limitations and weaker regulatory frameworks (Ramaswami et al., 2017 ; López-Santiago et al., 2024 ). The integration of diverse forms of capital natural, financial, social, and human is essential to building sustainable agri-food supply chains. Effective management of natural capital, which includes water, soil, and biodiversity, is crucial for sustaining agricultural productivity (Nassar et al., 2023 ; Darmaji et al., 2024 ). Financial capital allows for investments in sustainable infrastructure, such as efficient irrigation systems and renewable energy, to enhance resilience and reduce environmental impact (Ababou et al., 2023 ; López-Santiago et al., 2024 ). Social capital, encompassing trust, cooperation, and networks among stakeholders, plays a pivotal role in aligning efforts toward common sustainability goals (Ramaswami et al., 2017 ; Manikas et al., 2022 ). Human capital, including the skills and expertise of the workforce, is fundamental for implementing sustainable practices effectively (Vecchio et al., 2020 ; Abdelkafi et al., 2023 ). In Tunisia, where access to training in sustainable agriculture is limited, building human capital is critical to addressing labor shortages and social inequities in the agrifood sector (Nassar et al., 2023 ; López-Santiago et al., 2024 ; Manikas et al., 2022 ). Tunisia faces a significant challenge when it comes to finding enough workers for labor-intensive tasks in agriculture, such as harvesting crops and taking care of livestock. By focusing on local, Tunisian workers, who are naturally suited to these physical tasks, we can not only fill these critical gaps but also create a positive impact on the economy. When workers earn wages, they spend that money within their communities, which in turn boosts local businesses and strengthens the economy. This cycle, known as the "multiplier effect," helps create a more vibrant local economy and ensures that the agricultural sector contributes to Tunisia's broader economic growth. Moreover, working with local employees brings added benefits in terms of innovation and adaptability. Tunisian workers bring valuable knowledge and insights that can improve the agricultural sector's resilience to challenges like climate change or economic shifts. Their understanding of local conditions and needs is invaluable for making the agrifood system more sustainable and flexible. That said, there are still hurdles to overcome. Issues like unclear labor laws, lack of worker protections, and competing priorities among stakeholders could prevent the full potential of the local workforce from realized. It is crucial to address these concerns to ensure that Tunisian workers are not only given jobs but also treated fairly and supported in the end. 6.1. Challenges and Barriers Despite the clear benefits, there are significant challenges associated with the integration of African immigrants in Tunisia’s agrifood supply chain. A major hurdle is the lack of coordinated stakeholder engagement. Different actors in the supply chain farmers, processors, retailers often have competing interests. Farmers may focus on the economic benefits of immigrant labor, while retailers might prioritize ethical sourcing and sustainability certifications (Singh et al., 2023). This gap can prevent the successful integration of immigrants and limit potential gains in terms of productivity and sustainability. To overcome this, Tunisia needs stronger social capital strategies that foster collaboration and mutual trust among all stakeholders, ensuring that the interests of all parties aligned towards common sustainability goals. Furthermore, there are regulatory barriers that must be addressed to ensure the fair and equitable integration of immigrants. Current policies in Tunisia are not always conducive to the legal employment of immigrants, often lacking clear pathways to work permits and labour protections (López-Santiago et al., 2024 ). Without robust regulatory frameworks, immigrants are vulnerable to exploitation, which not only undermines their contributions to the agrifood sector but also creates social tension within communities. Addressing these gaps through regulatory reforms that provide legal protections, fair wages, and opportunities for skill development is crucial for unlocking the full potential of immigrant labour in Tunisia’s agrifood sector (Miar et al., 2024 ). To fully unlock the potential of the workforce in Tunisia's agri-food supply chain, it is essential to implement strategies that address both the economic and social aspects of integration. One important step is to offer vocational training programs tailored specifically to the agri-food sector. These programs will equip workers with the skills they need to enhance their productivity and improve their job prospects (Abdelkafi et al., 2023 ). Beyond benefiting the supply chain’s efficiency, this training will give individuals the opportunity to grow professionally and build a better future for them. Alongside training, it is crucial to run awareness campaigns that highlight the positive contributions of workers, especially in boosting agricultural productivity and enriching cultural diversity (Singh et al., 2023). These campaigns can play a key role in reducing prejudices and encouraging social harmony, helping people see workers as valuable members of the community. Working with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) can also provide further support, offering resources and advocacy for both workers and employers (Shahsavani et al., 2024 ). Finally, clear and fair regulations are necessary to ensure that workers are integrated in a sustainable and respectful way. Policymakers should focus on creating straightforward processes for legal employment, such as easier access to work permits and stronger labor protections (Miar et al., 2024 ). By safeguarding workers' rights, these policies will also help build a stable and reliable labor force, securing the future of Tunisia's agri-food supply chain. 6.2. Limitations of the Study and implications for Future Research This study provides valuable insights into the application of multi-capital approaches in agri-food supply chains but also faces several limitations. One notable challenge is the geographical imbalance in the existing literature, with most research focusing on developed regions like Europe and North America. This creates a gap in understanding how these approaches might work in developing regions, such as Tunisia, which face distinct sustainability challenges (Nassar et al., 2023 ; Amonkar & Patnaik, 2024 ). Another limitation is the lack of longitudinal data in many of the studies. Most offer a snapshot of sustainability practices at a particular point in time, but few explore the long-term effects, making it difficult to assess the durability and evolution of these strategies (Shahsavani et al., 2024 ). Additionally, methodological inconsistencies, such as varying sample sizes, data collection methods, and analytical techniques, complicate comparisons across studies, hindering the development of universal best practices for sustainability in agri-food systems (Singh et al., 2023). A significant gap in the literature is the limited focus on social and human capital. Discussions typically prioritize financial and natural capital, while the role of social factors in promoting sustainability remains underexplored (Shahsavani et al., 2024 ). There is also the potential for publication bias, where studies with more favorable outcomes are more likely to be published, possibly leading to an overestimation of the effectiveness of multi-capital strategies (Sinore & Wang, 2024 ). Despite these limitations, the study opens several avenues for future research. More localized studies in developing regions, particularly in Africa, South America, and Southeast Asia, are necessary due to their unique sustainability challenges. In Tunisia, for example, further research could investigate how various forms of capital interact within its agri-food context, particularly focusing on labor dynamics (Zhong et al., 2024 ). Longitudinal studies are crucial to understanding the lasting impacts of multi-capital approaches and assessing how they evolve in response to ongoing challenges such as climate change and economic shifts (Laso et al., 2018 ). Additionally, establishing standardized methodologies across studies could improve comparability, contributing to the development of universal frameworks for integrating sustainability into agri-food supply chains (Braun et al., 2018 ). A deeper focus on social and human capital is also increasingly important. Future research should explore how the inclusion of marginalized groups can strengthen social cohesion and economic productivity while addressing social inequities (Nugroho et al., 2022 ). Moreover, exploring regulatory frameworks that influence multi-capital integration is essential, especially in developing regions like Tunisia, where different regulatory environments may either support or hinder the effective integration of various capitals (Miar et al., 2024 ). Finally, technological integration presents a promising research area, particularly as digital tools continue to reshape supply chains (Tchonkouang et al., 2024 ). Investigating the role of digital technologies in supporting multi-capital integration could be valuable, especially for improving productivity and promoting social inclusion in agri-food sectors. 7. Conclusion This systematic literature review has provided an overview of the current state of research on sustainability and multi-capital integration in agri-food supply chains. While notable progress has been achieved, especially in developed regions, there remain substantial gaps in both research and practical application. Geographic imbalances, limited representation of certain types of capital, and inconsistent engagement of stakeholders continue to present significant challenges. The study shows that although both academic and industrial sectors are increasingly committed to sustainability, the absence of comprehensive theoretical frameworks and inconsistent policy supports still impede the widespread adoption of multi-capital approaches. To move forward, more region-specific research is needed, along with stronger theoretical foundations and better collaboration among stakeholders. Integrating sustainability and multi-capital approaches is essential for ensuring the long-term resilience and efficiency of agri-food supply chains. By addressing these challenges through targeted research and policy interventions, the field can continue to make meaningful strides toward achieving global sustainability goals. Recognizing the limitations of this review opens the door for more focused future research, which will address existing gaps and foster sustainable practices across diverse regions and contexts. Declarations Ethics approval: As this research used only data from the industry experts and academia based on their subjective judgement, no ethical approval was required. Funding: No funding was received for conducting this study. Conflict of interest: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. Data availability: The datasets generated and/or analyzed are included in this study. Code availability: Code is available on request due to privacy. Clinical trial number: not applicable. Clinical trial declarations: not applicable. Consent to Publish declaration: not applicable. Consent to Participate declaration: not applicable. Authors’ contributions: Khouloud Dammak: Conceptualization, Visualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Resources, Investigation, Writing-Original draft. Alaeddine Zouari: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision, Project administration, Resources, Writing-Original draft, Review and editing. Lilia Sidhom: Supervision, Project administration, Resources, Review and editing. Acknowledgments: This work is part/ funded of/by the research project entitled "Smart Models for Agri-Food Local value chain based on Digital technologies for Enabling covid-19 Resilience andSustainability" (SMALLDERS), funded by the PRIMA Program-Section 2 Call multi-topics 2021, through the Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research (Tunisia). References Ababou, M., Chelh, S., & Elhiri, M. (2023). A bibliometric analysis of the literature on Food Industry Supply Chain Resilience: Investigating Key contributors and Global trends. Sustainability , 15(11), 8812. Abdelkafi, N., Xu, J., Pero, M., Ciccullo, F., & Masi, A. (2023). Does the combination of sustainable business model patterns lead to truly sustainable business models? Critical analysis of existing frameworks and extensions. Journal of Business Economics , 93(4), 597-634. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-023-01140-0 Allaoui, H., Guo, Y., Choudhary, A., & Bloemhof, J. (2018). Sustainable agro-food supply chain design using two-stage hybrid multi-objective decision-making approach. Computers & Operations Research , 89, 369-384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2016.10.012 Amonkar, R.V., & Patnaik, D. (2024). Blockchain In Supply Chain Management: The Case Of Perishable Agricultural Products. African Journal of Biomedical Research , 27(3S), 1557-1566. Baridón, J.E., & Casas, R.R. (2014). Quality indicators in subtropical soils of Formosa, Argentina: Changes for agriculturization process. International Soil and Water Conservation Research , 2 (4), 13-24.https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-6339(15)30054-X Berti, G., & Mulligan, C. (2016). Competitiveness of small farms and innovative food supply chains: The role of food hubs in creating sustainable regional and local food systems. Sustainability , 8(7), 616. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8070616 Braun, C.L., Rombach, M., Häring, A.M., & Bitsch, V. (2018). A local gap in sustainable food procurement: Organic vegetables in Berlin’s school meals. Sustainability , 10(11), 4245. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10114245 Bukchin, S., & Kerret, D. (2018). Food for hope: The role of personal resources in farmers’ adoption of green technology. Sustainability , 10 (5), 1615. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051615 Castillo-Díaz, F.J., Belmonte-Ureña, L.J., Batlles-delaFuente, A., & Camacho-Ferre, F. (2023). Impact of Soil Biodisinfection Techniques in Horticultural Crops on Profitability within the Framework of the Circular Economy. Horticulturae , 9(8), 859. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae9080859 Chandan, A., John, M., & Potdar, V. (2023). Achieving UN SDGs in food supply chain using blockchain technology. Sustainability , 15(3), 2109. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032109 Chrysanthopoulou, F., Lameris, M., Greil, G., Vudragovic, D., & Flynn, K. (2022). An online innovation platform to promote collaboration and sustainability in short food supply chains. International Journal of Food Studies , 11, SI232-SI247. https://doi.org/10.7455/ijfs/11.SI.2022.a9 Darmaji, C.S., Utami, M.M.D., Firdaus, M.I., Purwoko, D., & Umami, M.R. (2024). Structure Requirements for Developing the Insurance Program Adoption for the Rice Farming Business in Banyuwangi Regency. Agricultural Science Digest-A Research Journal , 44(Of), 787-793. http://dx.doi.org/10.18805/ag.DF-610 Davis, K.F., Downs, S., & Gephart, J.A. (2021). Towards food supply chain resilience to environmental shocks. Nature Food, 2, 54-65. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-020-00196-3 Di Vaio, A., Boccia, F., Landriani, L., & Palladino, R. (2020). Artificial intelligence in the agri-food system: Rethinking sustainable business models in the COVID-19 scenario. Sustainability , 12(12), 4851. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12124851 Galal, N.M., & El-Kilany, K.S. (2016). Sustainable agri-food supply chain with uncertain demand and lead time. International Journal of Simulation Modelling , 15(3), 485-496. DOI:10.2507/IJSIMM15(3)8.350 Ganesh Kumar, C., Murugaiyan, P., Madanmohan, G. (2017). Agri-food supply chain management: literature review. Intelligent Information Management , 9, 68-96 Gava, O., Bartolini, F., Venturi, F., Brunori, G., Zinnai, A., & Pardossi, A. (2018). A Reflection of the Use of the Life Cycle Assessment Tool for Agri-Food Sustainability. Sustainability , 11 (1), 71. doi:10.3390/su11010171 Grigorieva, E., Livenets, A., Stelmakh, E. (2023). Adaptation of agriculture to climate change: Ascoping review. Climate , 11(10), 202 Hidayat, A. S., Managanta, A. A., Purwanto, P., & Nurjati, E. (2024). The link between collaborative advantage and productivity: Evidence from smallholder cocoa producers in Indonesia. Journal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development , 8(8), 4936. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12052052. Kakraliya, S.K., Jat, H.S., Singh, I., Sapkota, T.B., Singh, L.K., Sutaliya, J.M., ... & Jat, M.L. (2018). Performance of portfolios of climate smart agriculture practices in a rice-wheat system of western Indo-Gangetic plains. Agricultural Water Management , 202 , 122-133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2018.02.020 Kalungu, J. W., & Leal Filho, W. (2018). Adoption of appropriate technologies among smallholder farmers in Kenya. Climate and Development , 10 (1), 84-96. Kassam, A., Friedrich, T., & Derpsch, R. (2019). Global spread of conservation agriculture. International Journal of Environmental Studies , 76 (1), 29-51. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207233.2018.1494927 Khandker, V., & Thakurata, I. (2018). Factors encouraging complete adoption of agricultural technologies: the case of hybrid rice cultivation in India. Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies , 8 (2), 270-287. https://doi.org/10.1108/JADEE-05-2016-0037 Lagrasta, F. P., Pontrandolfo, P., & Scozzi, B. (2021). Circular economy business models for the Tanzanian coffee sector: A teaching case study. Sustainability , 13(24), 13931. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132413931 Laso, J., Hoehn, D., Margallo, M., García-Herrero, I., Batlle-Bayer, L., Bala, A., ... & Aldaco, R. (2018). Assessing energy and environmental efficiency of the Spanish agri-food system using the LCA/DEA methodology. Energies , 11(12), 3395. https://doi.org/10.3390/en11123395 León Bravo, V., Moretto, A., & Caniato, F. (2021). A roadmap for sustainability assessment in the food supply chain. British Food Journal , 123(13), 199-220. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-04-2020-0293 Li, D., Wang, X., Chan, H. K., & Manzini, R. (2014). Sustainable food supply chain management. International Journal of Production Economics , 152, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.04.003 López-Santiago, J., Md Som, A., Asyadi Bin Md Yusof, F., Mazarrón, F. R., & Gómez-Villarino, M. T. (2024). Exploring Sustainability in Wineries: Evaluating Food Safety and Environmental Management Aligning with the Farm to Fork Strategy. Agriculture , 14(3), 330. Luzzani, G., Grandis, E., Frey, M., & Capri, E. (2021). Blockchain technology in wine chain for collecting and addressing sustainable performance: An exploratory study. Sustainability , 13(22), 12898 Maesano, G., Milani, M., Nicolosi, E., D’Amico, M., & Chinnici, G. (2022). A network analysis for environmental assessment in wine supply chain. Agronomy , 12(1), 211. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12010211 Mahuwi, L., & Israel, B. (2023). Supply chain issues affecting market access among smallholder maize farmers in mbozi district, Tanzania. International Journal of Food and Agricultural Economics (IJFAEC) , 11(2), 115-129.http://dx.doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.334710 Malik, A., Lafortune, G., Dahir, S., Wendling, Z.A., Kroll C, Carter, S., Li, M., Lenzen, M. (2023). Global environmental and social spillover effects of EU’s food trade. Global Sustainability , 6, e6, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2023.4 Mangla, S.K., Luthra, S., Rich, N., Kumar, D., Rana, N.P., & Dwivedi, Y.K. (2018). Enablers to implement sustainable initiatives in agri-food supply chains. International Journal of Production Economics , 203, 379-393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.07.012 Manikas, I., Sundarakani, B., Anastasiadis, F., & Ali, B. (2022). A framework for food security via resilient agri-food supply chains: The case of UAE. Sustainability , 14(10), 6375. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14106375 Menéndez i Molist, A., Kallas, Z., & Guadarrama Fuentes, O.V. (2024). Assessing the Downstream and Upstream Preferences of Stakeholders for Sustainability Attributes in the Tomato Value Chain. Sustainability , 16(6), 2505. Mercuri, F., della Corte, G., & Ricci, F. (2021). Blockchain technology and sustainable business models: A case study of Devoleum. Sustainability , 13(10), 5619. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13105619 Miar, M., Rizani, A., Pardede, R., & Basrowi, B. (2024). Analysis of the effects of capital expenditure and supply chain on economic growth and their implications on the community welfare of districts and cities in central Kalimantan province. Uncertain Supply Chain Management , 12(1), 489-504. DOI: 10.5267/j.uscm.2023.9.003 Mizik, T. (2023). How can precision farming work on a small scale? A systematic literature review. Precision agriculture , 24(1), 384-406 Moreno-Miranda, C., Pilamala, A., Molina, I., Cerda-Mejía, L., Moreno-Miranda, R., & Rama, D. (2020). An assessment of emerging networks in the fruit sector: The case of inca berry in Ecuador. African Journal of Food, Agriculture, Nutrition and Development , 20(1), 15365-15382. Mwangi, G.M., Despoudi, S., Espindola, O.R., Spanaki, K., Papadopoulos, T. (2022). A planetary boundaries perspective on the sustainability: resilience relationship in the Kenyan tea supply chain. Annals of operations research , 319(1), 661-695 Nadaraja, D., Lu, C., & Islam, M. M. (2021). The sustainability assessment of plantation agriculture-a systematic review of sustainability indicators. Sustainable Production and Consumption , 26, 892-910. Naik, G., & Suresh, D.N. (2018). Challenges of creating sustainable agri-retail supply chains. IIMB management review , 30(3), 270-282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iimb.2018.04.001 Narwane, V.S., Gunasekaran, A., & Gardas, B.B. (2022). Unlocking adoption challenges of IoT in Indian agricultural and food supply chain. Smart Agricultural Technology , 2, 100035. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atech.2022.100035 Nassar, S., Tóth, Z. N., & Vasa, L. (2023). Economic empowerment as a result of achieving SDGs with resource access: A comparative research between Gaza Strip and Hungary. Journal of International Studies , 16(2), 9-33. Nayal, K., Raut, R.D., Narkhede, B.E., Priyadarshinee, P., Panchal, G.B., & Gedam, V.V. (2023). Antecedents for blockchain technology-enabled sustainable agriculture supply chain. Annals of operations research , 327(1), 293-337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-021-04423-3 Nugroho, A.D., Istvan, F., Fekete-Farkas, M., & Lakner, Z. (2022). How to improve agricultural value-added in the MENA region? Implementation of Diamond Porter's theory in agriculture. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems , 6, 956701. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2022.956701 Ogilvy, S. (2015). Developing the ecological balance sheet for agricultural sustainability. Sustainability unting, Management and Policy Journal , 6(2), 110-137. Page, K. L., Dang, Y. P., & Dalal, R. C. (2020). The ability of conservation agriculture to conserve soil organic carbon and the subsequent impact on soil physical, chemical, and biological properties and yield. Frontiers in sustainable food systems , 4 , 31. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2020.00031 Pawlak, K., & Kołodziejczak, M. (2020). The role of agriculture in ensuring food security in developing countries: Considerations in the context of the problem of sustainable food production. Sustainability , 12(13), 5488. Rahbari, M., Khamseh, A.A., & Mohammadi, M. (2023). A novel multi-objective robust fuzzy stochastic programming model for sustainable agri-food supply chain: case study from an emerging economy. Environmental Science and Pollution Research , 30(25), 67398-67442. Raimbekov, Z., Syzdykbayeva, B., Rakhmetulina, A., Rakhmetulina, Z., Abylaikhanova, T., Ordabayeva, M., & Doltes, L. (2023). The Impact of Agri-Food Supply Channels on the Efficiency and Links in Supply Chains. Economies , 11(8), 206. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies11080206. Ramaswami, A., Boyer, D., Nagpure, A.S., Fang, A., Bogra, S., Bakshi, B., ... & Rao-Ghorpade, A. (2017). An urban systems framework to assess the trans-boundary food-energy-water nexus: implementation in Delhi, India. Environmental Research Letters , 12(2), 025008. DOI 10.1088/1748-9326/aa5556 Riptanti, E. W., Irianto, H., Widiyanti, E., & Prasetyo, A. (2024). Inclusivity in the sustainability of micro and small enterprises based on digital technology: A case study in central Java, Indonesia. Journal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development , 8(9), 8300. https://doi.org/10.24294/jipd.v8i9.8300 Schulp, C.J., Komossa, F., Scherer, L., Van Der Zanden, E.H., Debolini, M., & Piorr, A. (2022). The role of different types of actors in the future of sustainable agriculture in a Dutch peri-urban area. Environmental Management , 70(3), 401-419 Shahsavani, I., Goli, A., & Hajiaghaei-Keshteli, M. (2024). A circular economy approach to design a citrus supply chain network. Annals of Operations Research , (in press). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-024-05829-5 Siebrecht, N. (2020). Sustainable agriculture and its implementation gap—Overcoming obstacles to implementation. Sustainability , 12 (9), 3853. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093853 Sims, B., & Heney, J. (2017). Promoting smallholder adoption of conservation agriculture through mechanization services. Agriculture , 7 (8), 64. Singh, K., Abraham, R., Yadav, J., Agrawal, A.K., Kolar, P., Misra, M., & Yadav, A. (2024). Analysis of barriers for sustainable agro-food supply chain: an interpretive structural modeling and MICMAC approach. Environment, Development and Sustainability , 26 (10), 25311-25333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-03680 Sinore, T., Wang, F. (2024). Impact of climate change on agriculture and adaptation strategies in Ethiopia: A meta-analysis. Heliyon , 10, e26103 Tchonkouang, R.D., Onyeaka, H., & Nkoutchou, H. (2024). Assessing the vulnerability of food supply chains to climate change-induced disruptions. Science of the Total Environment , 920 , 171047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.171047 Turner, I., Smart, A., Adams, E., & Pelletier, N. (2020). Building an ILCD/EcoSPOLD2–compliant data-reporting template with application to Canadian agri-food LCI data. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment , 25, 1402-1417. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-020-01748-2 Vecchio, Y., Iddrisu, A. L., Adinolfi, F., & De Rosa, M. (2020). Geographical indication to build up resilient rural economies: A case study from Ghana. Sustainability , 12 (5), 2052. Wang, J., Liu, T., Liu, Q., & Liu, X. (2024). Does trade credit facilitate high-quality development in agricultural enterprises?–Insights from Chinese enterprises. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems , 8, 1396739. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2024.1396739 Wünsche, J.F., & Fernqvist, F. (2022). The potential of blockchain technology in the transition towards sustainable food systems. Sustainability , 14(13), 7739. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14137739 Yadav, S., Luthra, S., & Garg, D. (2021). Modelling Internet of things (IoT)-driven global sustainability in multi-tier agri-food supply chain under natural epidemic outbreaks. Environmental Science and Pollution Research , 28(13), 16633-16654. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-11676-1 Zhang, Z., Yan, Q., Zheng, H., Zeng, M., & Chen, Y. (2024). Little Brands, Big Profits? Effect of Agricultural Geographical Indicators on County-Level Economic Development in China. Agriculture , 14(5), 767. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14050767 Zhong, J., Cheng, H., & Jia, F. (2024). Supply chain resilience capability factors in agri-food supply chains. Operations Management Research , 17 (3), 850-868. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12063-024-00470-8 Zurek, M., Ingram, J., Sanderson Bellamy, A., Goold, C., Lyon, C., Alexander, P., ...Withers, P. J. (2022). Food system resilience: concepts, issues, and challenges. Annual Review of Environment and Resources , 47, 511-534 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-6115997","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":446279606,"identity":"88405d0a-5991-4bd3-bf0e-8a40bf7d5ade","order_by":0,"name":"Khouloud Dammak","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"OLID Laboratory University of Sfax, Higher Institute of Industrial Management Sfax","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Khouloud","middleName":"","lastName":"Dammak","suffix":""},{"id":446279607,"identity":"1957f0bf-2301-4f8d-be44-0730d3759b56","order_by":1,"name":"Alaeddine Zouari","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"OLID Laboratory University of Sfax, Higher Institute of Industrial Management Sfax","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Alaeddine","middleName":"","lastName":"Zouari","suffix":""},{"id":446279608,"identity":"2cede779-e121-41c0-9930-cf6ee99b17a7","order_by":2,"name":"Lilia Sidhom","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"LAPER, Faculty of Science of Tunis, University Tunis El Manar","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Lilia","middleName":"","lastName":"Sidhom","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-02-26 20:53:18","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6115997/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6115997/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":81198468,"identity":"f907c291-4c8f-4da6-9858-d80c5b180816","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-23 10:48:01","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":93172,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStudy Selection Process\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6115997/v1/369ae2b1d64902af21ea5ff0.png"},{"id":81198467,"identity":"cc99a3b1-fed2-4e0e-9ead-195a96370c1d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-23 10:48:01","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":73116,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGeographical distribution of reviewed studies\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6115997/v1/e0497f55aa2c9be7ca999e16.png"},{"id":81198470,"identity":"dedfd162-2ae3-4287-ac46-f04fd8d727e5","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-23 10:48:02","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":64151,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSubject area focus (environmental, economic, social, human capital)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6115997/v1/462b69870b6eeb95d56e624e.png"},{"id":81198484,"identity":"52e5f09d-899c-40cc-93bb-03588e07a5bc","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-23 10:48:02","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":18345,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAnnual publication trends (2014–2024)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6115997/v1/309da8d7be3e92c44a1a58bc.png"},{"id":81198473,"identity":"97c6e097-6392-460f-92f4-7718f5f04fa0","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-23 10:48:02","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":224889,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eQuality Assessment of Studies\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6115997/v1/17a2a27913f76e36bb6fe181.png"},{"id":81198478,"identity":"f7a8adc0-2baf-4378-a7cf-23e979db06fd","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-23 10:48:02","extension":"png","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":514459,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDynamic Multi-Capital Integration Framework\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"6.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6115997/v1/61eadaabc1b5f6ed374e5885.png"},{"id":81547956,"identity":"bb8e3444-6243-4c7b-8e12-81ecc12702d9","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-28 12:09:02","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":2101328,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6115997/v1/ccb1b406-4c4f-4867-af16-e5b9bee7c2aa.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Sustainability and Multi-Capital Integration in Agri-Food Supply Chains: A Comprehensive Systematic Review","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe agri-food supply chain is essential for ensuring global food security, promoting economic development, and safeguarding environmental sustainability (Nayal et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). However, this critical sector faces increasingly complex and interconnected challenges. Resource depletion, environmental degradation, and evolving consumer expectations for sustainably produced food are exerting immense pressure on traditional supply chain models (Ababou et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Zhong et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). As natural resources like water, arable land, and biodiversity decrease, and climate change causes more frequent and severe disruptions, it has become urgent to rethink and restructure agri-food supply chains (Singh et al., 2023).These sustainability challenges have spurred important methodological advances in quantifying agriculture's dependence on natural systems. Pioneering work by Ogilvy (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) established frameworks for measuring natural capital impacts that are now being applied to agri-food systems, enabling researchers to systematically assess ecosystem services, track resource depletion costs, and evaluate sustainability trade-offs. Such measurement approaches provide crucial support for the multi-capital perspective this study employs.Traditional approaches to addressing these issues have often prioritized financial capital, focusing primarily on short-term gains and efficiency improvements (Mizik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). This emphasis reflects the fundamental role of financial capital - encompassing monetary resources, investment capabilities, and economic assets - as the lifeblood enabling critical investments in sustainable technologies, infrastructure, and innovation (Galal \u0026amp; El-Kilany, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Nassar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, these models fail to account for the broader impacts on natural resources, social equity, and human capital. As a result, many agri-food supply chains remain vulnerable to both environmental shocks and socio-economic volatility (Tchonkouang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Davis et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). In this context, multi-capital integration has emerged as a promising solution that transcends the limitations of traditional approaches by recognizing the interdependence of various forms of capital natural, financial, human, social, and intellectual (Shahsavani et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Riptanti et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccurately measuring these interdependent capitals requires specialized tools and standardized guidelines. For instance, Material Flow Cost Accounting (MFCA) has shown promise in quantifying monetary and material flows in agri-food organizations, particularly in tracking resource efficiency and waste reduction. While MFCA provides valuable insights into financial and natural capital interactions, its application to social and human capital measurement remains limited\u0026mdash;a gap this study aims to address through its comprehensive multi-capital framework.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNatural capital, which encompasses essential resources like water, soil, and biodiversity, is the foundation of agri-food systems(Ramaswami et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Darmaji et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Without sustainable management of these resources, the entire supply chain is at risk of collapse. Human capital, on the other hand, includes the skills, knowledge, and expertise of individuals across the supply chain, from farmers and laborers to entrepreneurs and policy-makers. The role of social capital, often overlooked, is equally critical. It consists of the networks, relationships, and trust that facilitate cooperation and resilience across supply chains, particularly in vulnerable communities (Rahbari et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe complex interactions between these capitals natural, financial, human, and social create dynamic synergies and trade-offs that challenge conventional measurement approaches. Emerging accounting frameworks like the Ecological Balance Sheet (EBS) and Environmental Profit \u0026amp; Loss (EP\u0026amp;L) represent important attempts to quantify these multidimensional relationships (Ogilvy, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). While these tools advance our understanding of natural-financial capital linkages, significant gaps remain in capturing the qualitative dimensions of human and social capital integration a challenge this study addresses through its comprehensive multi-capital assessment framework.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor instance, in developing regions such as Tunisia, where agricultural productivity is linked to the livelihoods of rural populations, fostering social cohesion and collaboration among stakeholders is essential for promoting long-term sustainability (Miar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Braun et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDespite the evident benefits of adopting a multi-capital approach, its application in agri-food supply chains remains underexplored in the literature, particularly in developing countries where these strategies could have the most significant impact (Galal \u0026amp; El-Kilany, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). Current research has focused on isolated aspects of sustainability, such as reducing food waste or enhancing energy efficiency (Nayal et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Nugroho et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). While these initiatives are important, they fail to address the broader and more systemic issues that arise from the interaction of multiple forms of capital. A more integrated approach is needed\u0026mdash;one that considers how natural, financial, social, and human capitals can work together to create a resilient, equitable, and sustainable agri-food system capable of withstanding both economic and environmental shocks (Darmaji et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Ramaswami et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoreover, the lack of focus on social equity and the inclusion of marginalized communities in these strategies, particularly in regions such as Africa, Latin America, and parts of Asia, highlights a critical gap in current research. These regions, where agriculture plays a crucial role in both economic development and social stability, often face the greatest sustainability challenges yet receive the least attention in terms of policy support and resource allocation (Zhong et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Integrating multi-capital strategies into these contexts could help not only in improving environmental sustainability but also in advancing social justice and economic inclusivity, ensuring that the benefits of sustainable agri-food supply chains are shared more equitably (Miar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Raimbekov et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis review seeks to address this gap by exploring how different forms of capital are integrated into agri-food supply chains and how this integration can contribute to sustainable development (L\u0026oacute;pez-Santiago et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). The findings of this review will provide valuable insights for policymakers, practitioners, and researchers looking to promote sustainability in the agri-food sector (Mangla et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Sims \u0026amp; Heney, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNumerous studies explore sustainability practices in agri-food supply chains, but they overlook how multi-capital approaches are applied and how these approaches specifically influence the efficiency and effectiveness of these supply chains. This gap presents a significant challenge for both researchers and practitioners, as a comprehensive synthesis of these approaches is lacking. Without this synthesis, it is difficult to identify best practices, barriers (Sinor et al (2024), and facilitators that can guide the successful implementation of sustainability strategies in the agri-food sector.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis systematic literature review seeks to address the existing research gap by analyzing the impact of sustainability and multi-capital approaches on agri-food supply chains. The primary objective is to examine how these approaches contribute to enhancing sustainability in this critical sector. Specifically, the review aims to identify key sustainable practices within agri-food supply chains, explore the integration of various forms of capital to achieve sustainable outcomes, and assess both the challenges and opportunities that arise from implementing multi-capital strategies. Additionally, it seeks to understand the perceptions and attitudes of stakeholders toward these sustainability and multi-capital approaches, providing valuable insights into the potential for widespread adoption and effectiveness of these methods across different regions and contexts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis research is guided by four main research questions (RQs) aimed at exploring the multi-capital approaches and sustainability in agri-food supply chains:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eRQ1: What are the key sustainable practices currently implemented in agri-food supply chains?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eRQ2: How are different forms of capital (natural, financial, social, and human) integrated to enhance sustainability within these supply chains?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eRQ3: What are the main barriers and facilitators affecting the adoption of multi-capital approaches in agri-food supply chains?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eRQ4: How do stakeholders perceive and respond to sustainability and multi-capital strategies within agri-food supply chains?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe answers to these research questions will uncover the implications of this study on both professional practice and broader societal impact. On one hand, they will help clarify the practical application of multi-capital approaches in enhancing sustainability in agri-food supply chains. On the other hand, they will reveal the factors\u0026mdash;both enablers and barriers (Sinore \u0026amp; Wang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) that influence the successful integration of multiple forms of capital, leading to improved supply chain resilience and sustainability (Nayal et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe article is structured as follows: Section 2 outlines the methodology used to conduct the literature review, including data collection and analysis procedures. Section 3 presents a descriptive analysis of the collected studies, discussing the sustainable practices identified, the integration of various capitals, as well as the key challenges and opportunities. Finally, Section 4 concludes the study, summarizing the findings, offering new insights, and highlighting the limitations of the research.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Methodology","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn this systematic review, comprehensive search was conducted using the following databases: Scopus and Web of Science. These databases were chosen for their comprehensive coverage of peer-reviewed journals in sustainability, supply chain management, and agri-food systems. Their indexing rigor minimizes inclusion of low-quality sources. While both databases provide broad coverage, they employ different search protocols: Scopus utilizes the TITLE-ABS-KEY field to search titles, abstracts, and keywords simultaneously, whereas Web of Science employs the TS (Topic) field which additionally includes Keywords Plus. The search strategy was carefully adapted to account for these technical differences while maintaining conceptual consistency across both platforms.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe search strategy employed for this study was structured around a set of targeted keywords designed to identify relevant articles on sustainability within the agri-food sector. Specifically, keywords such as \"sustainability\", \"multi-capital\", \"agri-food\", \"agro-food\", \"agrifood\", and \"supply chain\" were used to capture the broad landscape of literature focusing on sustainable practices and multi-capital frameworks within the supply chain of the agri-food and agricultural sectors. All variant spellings of agricultural-food systems terminology were included to ensure comprehensive coverage. The selected 2014\u0026ndash;2024 timeframe aligns with the post-Sustainable Development Goals adoption period, capturing the most recent developments in multi-capital approaches while ensuring sufficient literature coverage for robust analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo ensure precision in the search results, a refined search string was applied, using the syntax TITLE-ABS-KEY (sustainability AND multi-capital AND agri-food OR agro-food OR agrifood AND supply AND chain). This approach allowed the search to focus on specific types of documents, thereby excluding irrelevant materials and narrowing the results to sources with titles, abstracts, or keywords directly aligned with the study\u0026rsquo;s objectives. This methodological refinement was essential to obtaining a relevant and high-quality selection of articles for comprehensive analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis strategy ensured that only articles addressing sustainability and multi-capital approaches in agri-food supply chains were retrieved while excluding papers focusing on unrelated topics such as animal food or specific regions (Australia, Colombia, China, India, Brazil, Spain, and Italy).They were excluded to maintain a broader, global perspective on sustainability and multi-capital approaches in agri-food supply chains. These regions often have unique regulatory, economic, or environmental contexts that may not be generalizable to other parts of the world. By excluding them, we aimed to avoid skewing the analysis toward localized trends and instead focus on universally applicable insights.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearch centered on specific crops like fruits was excluded because such studies often address niche challenges (e.g., perishability, seasonal variability) that may not align with the broader objectives of this review. Our goal was to analyze sustainability practices and capital integration across diverse agri-food systems rather than focusing on crop-specific dynamics. This ensures the findings are relevant to a wider range of agricultural products and supply chain models. Additionally, the search excluded document types such as reviews, conference papers, book chapters, and books to focus on peer-reviewed journal articles.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTimeframe (2014\u0026ndash;2024): Captures post-2015 literature aligned with the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), ensuring relevance to contemporary sustainability challenges.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDocument Types: Limiting to peer-reviewed journal articles (excluding reviews, conferences, etc.) prioritizes original research with validated methodologies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmpirical Focus: Only studies with qualitative/quantitative data were included to ground findings in observable practices.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFollowing the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methodology, the researchers defined inclusion and exclusion criteria to ensure the relevance and quality of the selected literature. The Table \u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, presents the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInclusion and Exclusion Criteria\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCriteria Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInclusion Criteria\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExclusion Criteria\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLanguage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eArticles written in English\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eArticles written in languages other than English\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime Frame\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudies published within the last 10 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudies published more than 10 years ago\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudy Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eArticles\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReviews, conference papers, book chapters, books\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eKeywords\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMust include terms related to sustainability, multi-capital, agri-food, and supply chain\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eArticles focused on animal food, fruits, commerce, or excluded regions\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFocus\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearch addressing sustainability and multi-capital approaches in agri-food supply chains\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eArticles not addressing or sustainability and multi-capital approaches\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eData Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmpirical research with qualitative or quantitative data\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTheoretical papers without empirical data\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe systematic review began by conducting a thorough search across two major academic databases: Web of Science (WOS) and Scopus, using keywords specifically designed to capture studies related to sustainability, multi-capital frameworks, and agri-food supply chains. The search results underwent multiple stages of screening and filtering, starting from the elimination of duplicates to full-text assessments based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. This process resulted in a refined and relevant set of studies, ensuring that only high-quality research focusing on the key areas of interest was included in the final analysis. The following diagram outlines each step of the review process, along with the corresponding number of articles included or excluded at each stage. It visually represents the journey from initial identification to the final inclusion of articles in the review.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe systematic review process follows several key steps, as illustrated in the diagram in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e. During the identification phase, the research focused on the concepts of \"sustainability,\" \"multi-capital,\" and \"agri-food supply chain,\" utilizing two primary databases: Web of Science (WOS) and Scopus. This search identified 198 articles in WOS and 277 in Scopus, resulting in 475 articles. In the screening phase, 56 duplicates removed, leaving 419 unique articles. A filtering process based on titles, abstracts, and keywords narrowed the selection to 169 relevant articles. Out of these, 40 articles excluded for not meeting the analysis criteria. A full-text evaluation then shortlisted 75 articles aligned with the research objectives. At the final selection stage, after a thorough review, 98 articles were included in the systematic review. However, some exclusions were made at this stage: 15 articles lacked practical descriptions, 6 were not directly related to agri-food, 4 were not case studies, and 2 were excluded due to the unavailability of their full text.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe following exclusions were applied during the full-text review phase (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e):\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e15 articles lacked practical descriptions: These studies were excluded because they presented theoretical frameworks or conceptual models without empirical evidence (e.g., case studies, quantitative/qualitative data, or actionable insights). For this review, we prioritized studies that demonstrated practical applications of multi-capital approaches (e.g., measurable sustainability outcomes, stakeholder engagement processes, or supply chain interventions).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e8 articles were not directly related to agri-food: These articles discussed sustainability or capital integration in unrelated sectors (e.g., manufacturing, energy) or focused on non-agricultural food systems (e.g., fisheries, aquaculture).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e5 articles were not case studies: Non-empirical studies (e.g., opinion papers, editorials) were excluded to maintain focus on evidence-based practices.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e2 articles were excluded due to unavailability of full text: These articles could not be accessed despite institutional subscriptions and interlibrary requests, risking incomplete analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis systematic review resulted in the selection of 75 articles after eliminating duplicates and filtering articles based on predefined relevance criteria. This rigorous process ensured that only relevant and complete studies were included, focusing specifically on sustainability, multi-capital approaches, and agri-food supply chains. The high exclusion rate at each stage demonstrates the thoroughness of the selection process, ultimately leading to a high-quality dataset for the final analysis.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"3. Data Extraction","content":"\u003cp\u003eTo maintain consistency and comprehensiveness, the team extracted data from each of the 98 selected studies using a structured template. This template captured key variables related to sustainability and multi-capital integration within agri-food supply chains. The extraction process includes two phases:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003col\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003ePreliminary Review\u003c/b\u003e: The team reviewed each study's title, abstract, and keywords to confirm alignment with the systematic review\u0026rsquo;s objectives.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eFull-Text Review and Data Extraction\u003c/b\u003e: For studies that passed the initial screening, the team used predefined variables (detailed below) to extract data. Microsoft Excel facilitated the process, with two independent reviewers handling the data extraction to ensure accuracy and consistency.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003c/ol\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe data extraction focused on several key variables, including sustainability metrics, forms of capital, stakeholder perceptions, barriers and facilitators, and outcomes. The extracted data then categorized for further analysis to identify patterns and insights regarding the integration of multicapital approaches in agri-food supply chains.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEach study systematically reviewed by following the multi-step extraction process, with specific attention to empirical research. Quantitative variables such as environmental, economic, and social performance metrics recorded. The results were stored in a central database for subsequent analysis, focusing on identifying long-term trends and the impact of multicapital strategies on sustainability outcomes. The table A1 summarizes the key variables that collected from each study.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"4. Quality Assessment of Studies","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe quality assessment of the studies included in this systematic review was conducted using a structured approach to ensure the reliability and credibility of the findings. A combination of established tools and criteria utilized to evaluate each study's methodological rigor. Specifically, we employed the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tools, which provide checklists tailored for various study designs, including qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods research. The assessment criteria focused on key aspects such as the appropriateness of the research design, clarity of research objectives, sample size and representativeness, validity and reliability of data collection methods, and thoroughness of data analysis. Each study is reviewed using a standardized checklist that rated essential criteria with binary responses (Yes/No/Unclear), Table \u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e. The results of the quality assessment documented systematically, allowing us to identify high-quality studies and consider potential biases or limitations in the overall analysis. This rigorous quality assessment process not only strengthened the integrity of the review but also ensured that the conclusions drawn from the literature reflect robust evidence regarding sustainability and multicapital integration in agrifood supply chains.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFollowing the quality assessment framework, we developed a checklist to evaluate each study's methodological quality. This checklist includes key criteria essential for assessing the robustness of research findings, such as study design, data collection methods, and reporting standards. Each criterion designed to provide a clear picture of the study's quality, enabling us to ensure that only the most credible and relevant research was included in our analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eQuality Assessment Checklist\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCriteria\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eQuestion\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRating\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearch Design\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIs the research design appropriate for the research question?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes/No/Unclear\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eClarity of Objectives\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAre the objectives clearly stated and relevant?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes/No/Unclear\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSample Size\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIs the sample size sufficient and representative?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes/No/Unclear\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eData Collection Methods\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAre the data collection methods valid and reliable?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes/No/Unclear\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBias and Confounding\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDoes the study address potential biases and confounding factors?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes/No/Unclear\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eData Analysis\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAre the data analysis methods appropriate and well explained?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes/No/Unclear\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEthical Considerations\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWere ethical standards followed?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes/No/Unclear\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReporting\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAre the results well reported and aligned with objectives?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes/No/Unclear\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLimitations\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAre study limitations acknowledged and discussed?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes/No/Unclear\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe implementation of this quality assessment checklist was instrumental in ensuring the reliability and relevance of the studies selected for this systematic review. By systematically evaluating each study against these criteria, we were able to identify strengths and weaknesses in the existing literature. This assessment not only enhances the credibility of the review findings but also guides future research efforts by highlighting areas where methodological improvements are needed in the field of sustainability and multicapital integration in agrifood supply chains.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"5. Results","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe results of this review provide a detailed overview of how different forms of capital natural, financial, social, and human integrated within agri-food supply chains to achieve sustainability. The findings reveal regional disparities in the adoption of multi-capital approaches, with developed regions often leading in sustainable practices due to advanced infrastructure and supportive policies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.1. Descriptive Analysis of the Studie\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis section presents a descriptive analysis of the reviewed studies across six key dimensions. First, our geographic analysis reveals a pronounced imbalance in research distribution, with Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e showing that 72% of studies originate from developed regions (particularly Europe and North America), while only 18% focus on developing regions in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Second, subject area analysis demonstrates that environmental sustainability dominates the literature (58% of studies), followed by economic (22%) and social (20%) dimensions. Third, temporal analysis of documents by year shows a marked increase in publications after 2015, coinciding with the adoption of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Fourth, document type analysis confirms that 89% of included works are peer-reviewed journal articles. Fifth, source analysis indicates that 63% of publications appear in sustainability-focused journals. Finally, our quality assessment evaluates methodological rigor using Joanna Briggs Institute criteria, revealing that while 82% of studies employed appropriate research designs, only 45% adequately addressed potential biases. Together, these analyses provide a comprehensive foundation for identifying critical trends and persistent gaps in agri-food sustainability research.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFigure \u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e confirms a strong bias toward developed regions, with Europe and North America comprising 68% of studies, while Africa and Latin America represented only 12%. This imbalance partially stems from our exclusion of region-specific studies, but more critically reflects systemic underrepresentation of developing regions in sustainability literature (Nassar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; L\u0026oacute;pez-Santiago et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).We emphasize that this geographic gap is methodologically consequential, as these underrepresented regions face the most severe sustainability challenges yet lack tailored research on multi-capital integration.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn contrast, developing regions face significant barriers such as resource constraints, lack of access to technology, and policy frameworks that may not prioritize sustainability. This leads an under-representation of research from these regions, despite the fact that they face some of the most pressing sustainability challenges in agrifood systems.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFigure \u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e highlights the interdisciplinary nature of the reviewed studies, which span environmental sciences, economics, agriculture, and supply chain management. Most of the research emphasizes environmental sustainability, while fewer studies address the integration of social and financial capitals.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe focus on environmental concerns reflects the complexity of sustainability in agri-food supply chains, which extends beyond ecological issues to include economic viability and social equity. Despite their importance, financial capital encompassing investments in sustainable practices and social capital focused on community engagement and labor practices remain underexplored. The imbalance across subject areas, illustrated in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e, points to a gap in fully understanding and applying multi-capital approaches to achieve long-term resilience and sustainability in supply chains.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePublications surged post-2015 (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e), coinciding with the SDGs. However, longitudinal studies (\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;5 years) were rare (8%), limiting insights into long-term capital interactions (Shahsavani et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe rise in research reflects a growing global awareness and commitment to sustainability, particularly following the adoption of the SDGs in 2015. Empirical evidence supports this trend: publications on agri-food sustainability increased by 162% post-2015 compared to the preceding decade (Web of Science data, 2024), with 72% of included studies explicitly linking their frameworks to SDG targets The trend indicates that sustainability in agri-food supply chains has become an increasingly relevant topic in both academic and industry sectors. The continued growth in publications also highlights the recognition of multi-capital integration as a crucial factor in achieving sustainability goals, although the field of research is still evolving.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe growing volume of research signifies increasing global attention to sustainability. This trend is likely to continue as more organizations align with the SDGs, driving further research and practical applications in agrifood systems.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe majority of documents included in this review are empirical peer-reviewed journal articles, selected for their methodological rigor and relevance to the topic. Other document types such as reviews, conference papers, book chapters, and books excluded to ensure that the study focused on high quality, data-driven research directly addressing sustainability and multi-capital approaches within agri-food supply chains. This emphasis on empirical studies highlights the practical applications of multi-capital integration in specific supply chains or regions. In addition, most studies published in specialized journals focused on sustainability, environmental science, and agri-food systems.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe concentration of research in these specialized journals reflects the emerging and niche nature of the field. Publishing in interdisciplinary or generalist journals could help expand the reach of this research, making it more accessible to policy-makers, practitioners, and researchers from other fields such as economics, social sciences, and global development. Additionally, diversifying publication venues could encourage more cross-disciplinary collaboration, which is crucial for addressing the complex sustainability challenges within agri-food supply chains.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe quality of the studies was generally high, with most meeting the methodological standards for robustness and validity. Figure\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e evaluates the quality of a research study based on various criteria, categorized into \"Yes,\" \"No,\" and \"Unclear.\" The majority of the criteria, such as the appropriateness of the research design, clarity of objectives, validity and reliability of data collection methods, and adherence to ethical standards, received \"Yes\" responses, indicating strong performance in these areas.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe evaluation parameters used in this review, as shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, are justified by their alignment with established standards for assessing the methodological rigor and credibility of academic research. The clarity of research objectives is essential, as it enables a clear understanding of the study\u0026rsquo;s aims and ensures that findings can be interpreted within an appropriate context. The appropriateness of the research design is equally critical, as it reflects whether the chosen methods\u0026mdash;qualitative, quantitative, or mixed\u0026mdash;are suitable for addressing the research questions, especially given the complexity of sustainability and multicapital considerations in agrifood supply chains. Validity and reliability of data collection methods are fundamental to ensuring that the data accurately represent the constructs under investigation, which is particularly important when evaluating intangible capitals such as natural, social, and human. Adherence to ethical standards reinforces the integrity of the research process and protects the rights and well-being of participants, especially when studies involve multiple stakeholders across different levels of the supply chain. Furthermore, the inclusion of criteria that assess the extent to which studies address potential bias and confounding factors is vital for safeguarding internal validity and the reliability of conclusions. A robust discussion of study limitations demonstrates transparency and allows readers to assess the scope and applicability of the findings. Finally, ensuring that the results are aligned with the stated objectives confirms that the research delivers on its intended goals and enhances the overall coherence and usefulness of the study. Collectively, these parameters provide a comprehensive framework for evaluating the methodological quality of studies and ensuring the robustness of conclusions drawn from the literature.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, there are notable weaknesses. For example, addressing potential bias and confounding factors, as well as adequately discussing study limitations, received a mix of \"No\" and \"Unclear\" responses, suggesting gaps in these critical areas. The reporting of results, while generally aligned with objectives, also has room for improvement.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe research demonstrates a solid foundation in terms of design, ethical adherence, and methodology, but it falls short in addressing biases, confounding factors, and study limitations. To strengthen the study, more attention should be given to mitigating potential biases, thoroughly discussing limitations, and ensuring comprehensive reporting that aligns with the research objectives\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.2. Integrating Key Capitals for Sustainable Agrifood Supply Chains\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn this section, we will examine the integration of key capitals essential for sustainable agri-food supply chains. First, we discuss Natural Capital, which includes fundamental resources such as water, soil, and biodiversity. Second, we address Financial Capital, emphasizing the role of investments in infrastructure and sustainable technologies. Third, Social Capital is explored, highlighting the importance of networks, trust, and community engagement among stakeholders to foster collaboration and resilience across the supply chain. Fourth, we analyze Human Capital, focusing on the skills, knowledge, and training necessary for adopting innovative, sustainable practices within the workforce. This section illustrates how the integration of these capitals creates a holistic framework for achieving resilience and sustainability in agri-food systems, aligning with global sustainability objectives.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.2.1. Natural Capital: Foundation of Sustainability in Agrifood Supply Chains\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eNatural capital encompasses essential resources such as water, soil, and biodiversity (Mwangi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Amonkar \u0026amp; Patnaik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), which form the basis of agri-food supply chains.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePractical applications of this approach include circular economy models, such as water recycling systems in Indonesian farms (Hidayat et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), which have demonstrated improved resource efficiency. However, these innovations often depend on two critical enablers: financial investments for infrastructure and comprehensive farmer training programs. Effectively managing these resources ensures the long-term sustainability of production systems while mitigating negative environmental impacts (Zhang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Integrating circular economy principles into production, as demonstrated by Nadaraja et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), optimizes the use of natural resources like soil and water, reduces waste, and minimizes environmental harm (Hidayat et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) such as .\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNevertheless, significant barriers persist, particularly in developing regions. For instance, Tunisia's agricultural sector faces challenges due to fragmented land policies and limited access to advanced technologies, which collectively hinder effective natural capital management (Nassar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). This approach to managing natural capital enhances the sustainability and profitability of supply chains by maximizing resource efficiency. However, ensuring proper management of natural capital requires collaboration across stakeholders (Riptanti et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Farmers play a crucial role in conserving water and soil (Narwane et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), but often face challenges such as limited access to resources and insufficient training (Mangla et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). On the other hand, downstream actors, such as retailers, tend to focus on ethical sourcing and sustainability certifications, which can influence the entire supply chain\u0026rsquo;s approach to resource conservation (Sims \u0026amp; Heney, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Understanding and aligning the different perspectives of stakeholders is critical for achieving sustainability. By promoting collaboration and shared responsibility, natural resources can be preserved and utilized more effectively, securing the future of sustainable agri-food supply chains (Page et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.2.2 Financial Capital: Pillar of Investment for Sustainability\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinancial capital is pivotal in enabling investments in infrastructure and practices that drive sustainability within agri-food supply chains. This includes critical infrastructure upgrades such as solar-powered irrigation systems in India (Narwane et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), which demonstrate how targeted financial investments can enhance both economic resilience and environmental sustainability. In Central Kalimantan, Indonesia, financial investments have been instrumental in improving infrastructure, thereby enhancing both economic resilience and sustainability (Miar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Capital expenditure plays a critical role in fostering local economic growth, demonstrating that access to financial capital is a key driver of sustainable development. However, significant research gaps remain, as only 18% of reviewed studies explored inclusive financing mechanisms (e.g., blockchain-based microloans) tailored for smallholder farmers (Nayal et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).This oversight is particularly problematic given the crucial role smallholders play in global food systems.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurthermore, financial capital increases the efficiency and resilience of supply chains. Investments in technologies like energy-efficient tools and climate-smart agricultural practices allow supply chains to better withstand environmental and economic disruptions (Bukchin \u0026amp; Kerret, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Kakraliya et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e) acting financial capital, supply chains can adapt more effectively to changing market conditions, ensuring stable productivity even during periods of crisis. Moreover, the integration of multiple capitals, particularly financial and natural, further enhances the resilience of supply chains, as noted by Sinore and Wang (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), who found that combining various forms of capital mitigates the impact of environmental shocks like climate change (Naik \u0026amp; Suresh, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Thus, financial capital not only meets short-term operational demands but also strengthens the supply chain\u0026rsquo;s long-term resilience and flexibility, supporting sustainable operations well into the future (Nassar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.2.3 Social Capital: Key to Collaboration and Sustainability\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial capital, which includes networks, relationships, and trust among actors in agri-food supply chains, is essential for facilitating cooperation and achieving shared sustainability goals. A prime example of this is found in Ghana, where shea butter producer cooperatives successfully utilized collective bargaining strategies to access premium export markets (Abdelkafi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). The case of shea butter production in Ghana illustrates how social capital can foster sustainability. Collective action among shea butter producers has enabled them to pool resources, access larger markets, and operate more sustainably (Abdelkafi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Strengthening social capital enhances the resilience and sustainability of supply chains by promoting collaboration among stakeholders, leading to better resource management and improved outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, significant challenges persist in other regions, particularly in North Africa where weak farmer networks and limited institutional support have substantially reduced knowledge-sharing opportunities (L\u0026oacute;pez-Santiago et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Social capital also supports smallholder farmers in many agri-food supply chains, who benefit from the collective bargaining power, market access, and knowledge-sharing opportunities provided by producer organizations (Tchonkouang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e. These collective efforts are vital for advancing sustainability initiatives and ensuring that small-scale producers have the tools and resources needed to implement sustainable practices (Mahuwi \u0026amp; Israel, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) social capital grows, so does the capacity for stakeholders to manage resources efficiently, contributing to positive environmental and social outcomes across the supply chain. By fostering trust and cooperation, social capital empowers actors to work together towards a more sustainable future.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.2.4. Human Capital: Driver of Innovation and Sustainability\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eHuman capital, which includes the skills, expertise (Zhang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), and knowledge of individuals within agri-food supply chains, is essential for driving innovation and adopting sustainable practices (Yadav et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). A striking example comes from Indonesia, where targeted digital training programs for micro-enterprise workers led to a 40% increase in sustainable practice adoption (Riptanti et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), demonstrating the transformative potential of skill development. Riptanti et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) found also that micro-enterprises that invested in digital literacy and workforce training saw significant improvements in operational sustainability. Developing human capital through education and skill building is therefore crucial for encouraging the adoption of new, more sustainable practices within agri-food businesses (Nadaraja et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe importance of policy support is equally critical, as evidenced by EU subsidy programs for farmer education that directly correlated with higher sustainability certification rates (Braun et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). In regions where governments support training programs and provide access to modern technologies, the adoption of sustainable practices is notably higher (Nassar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Policy frameworks that prioritize human capital development by promoting education and providing essential resources\u0026mdash;equip farmers and entrepreneurs with the skills needed to implement innovations that enhance sustainability (Braun et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Research shows that regions with strong policy support tend to have higher rates of sustainable practice adoption compared to areas lacking such regulatory frameworks (L\u0026oacute;pez-Santiago et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Human capital thus becomes a cornerstone of sustainability, enabling stakeholders to drive innovation, boost productivity, and build resilience in agri-food supply chains (Narwane et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Investing in human capital is critical for the resilience and sustainability of agri-food supply chains (Abdelkafi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). As the industry faces challenges such as climate change (Amonkar \u0026amp; Patnaik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), technological advancements (Yadav et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), and shifting consumer preferences, a well-trained and adaptable workforce becomes essential. Continuous education and skill development empower employees to implement innovative practices, optimize processes, and respond effectively to emerging trends. Without such investment, agri-food supply chains risk stagnation, limiting their ability to meet demand and potentially compromising both food security and economic stability. Therefore, prioritizing human capital development is not just beneficial it is essential for the future success of the agri-food sector.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.3. Conceptual Framework for Integrating Crucial Capitals in the Agrifood Supply Chain\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.3.1 Development Methodology\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe conceptual framework emerges from a comprehensive synthesis of 75 peer-reviewed studies published between 2014 and 2024. It was developed through a multi-step methodology designed to ensure both analytical rigor and contextual relevance. First, a systematic process was applied to identify and categorize capital-related variables like shower in table 3\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eData Extraction Variables\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCategory\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescription\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime cited\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReferences\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSustainability Metrics\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEnvironmental Performance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMetrics such as carbon emissions, water use, energy efficiency\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Malik et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); ( Laso et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e); (Mwangi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Hidayat et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Zhong et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Amonkar \u0026amp; Patnaik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Lagrasta et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e); (Riptanti et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Rahbari et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e;) (Kassam et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e); (Galal \u0026amp; El-Kilany, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEconomic Performance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinancial outcomes like cost savings, profitability\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Miar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e);( Zhang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Narwane et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Nassar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Hidayat et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Vecchio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e); (Ababou et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Zhong et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Schulp et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Mizik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Braun et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e); (Men\u0026eacute;ndez i Molist et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Castillo-D\u0026iacute;az et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Raimbekov et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Galal \u0026amp; El-Kilany, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial Performance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial factors like labor practices, community impact\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Mwangi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Vecchio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e); (Schulp et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Hidayat et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Miar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Moreno-Miranda et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e); (Kassam et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e); (Rahbari et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Manikas et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Gava et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eForms of Capital\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNatural Capital\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntegration of natural resources, biodiversity, and environmental protection\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Men\u0026eacute;ndez i Molist et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Rahbari et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Narwane et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Davis et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e); (Mwangi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Hidayat et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Amonkar \u0026amp; Patnaik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Schulp et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Darmaji et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Ramaswami et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial Capital\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInvolvement of communities, social equity, stakeholder engagement\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Hidayat et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (L\u0026oacute;pez-Santiago et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Mahuwi \u0026amp; Israel, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Vecchio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e); (Nassar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Ababou et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Nadaraja et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e); (Zhang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Miar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Rahbari et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Men\u0026eacute;ndez i Molist et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Chandan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Chrysanthopoulou et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Di Vaio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e); (Mercuri et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e); (Schulp et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinancial Capital\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEconomic performance, cost-benefit analysis, investments\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Mercuri et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e); (Wang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Luzzani et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e); (Lagrasta et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e); (Maesano et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Zhang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Narwane et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Nassar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Hidayat et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Ababou et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Amonkar \u0026amp; Patnaik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Miar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Braun et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e); (Mizik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHuman Capital\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSkills development, workforce improvements\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Men\u0026eacute;ndez i Molist et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Rahbari et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Narwane et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Davis et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e); (Mwangi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Hidayat et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Amonkar \u0026amp; Patnaik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Schulp et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Darmaji et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Ramaswami et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e); (Abdelkafi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntellectual Capital\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInnovation, technology integration in the supply chain\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Amonkar \u0026amp; Patnaik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Zhong et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Nayal et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Rahbari et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Amonkar \u0026amp; Patnaik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Hidayat et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Mwangi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Naik \u0026amp; Suresh, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e); (Laso et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e); (Narwane et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (W\u0026uuml;nsche \u0026amp; Fernqvist, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Luzzani et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e); (Yadav et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e); (Chrysanthopoulou et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Di Vaio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e); (Ganesh Kumar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e); (Grigorieva et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Turner et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e); (Kalungu \u0026amp; Leal Filho, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStakeholder Perceptions\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStakeholder Attitudes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHow different stakeholders perceive sustainability initiatives\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Men\u0026eacute;ndez i Molist et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (L\u0026oacute;pez-Santiago et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Rahbari et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Narwane et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Amonkar \u0026amp; Patnaik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Nassar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Schulp et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Vecchio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e); (Mizik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Le\u0026oacute;n Bravo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e); (Barid\u0026oacute;n \u0026amp; Casas, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStakeholder Engagement\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLevel of participation in multicapital strategies\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(L\u0026oacute;pez-Santiago et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Amonkar \u0026amp; Patnaik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Davis et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e); (Narwane et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Nassar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Hidayat et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Schulp et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Mizik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Braun et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e); (Le\u0026oacute;n Bravo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e); (Barid\u0026oacute;n \u0026amp; Casas, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e); (Li et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e); (Zurek et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR69\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBarriers and Facilitators\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBarriers\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChallenges to implementing multicapital approaches\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Singh et al., 2023); (Mwangi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Rahbari et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Mwangi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Amonkar \u0026amp; Patnaik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Amonkar \u0026amp; Patnaik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Men\u0026eacute;ndez i Molist et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Hidayat et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Berti \u0026amp; Mulligan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e); (Siebrecht, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFacilitators\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFactors that promote successful integration\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Malik et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Abdelkafi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Amonkar \u0026amp; Patnaik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Mwangi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Rahbari et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (W\u0026uuml;nsche \u0026amp; Fernqvist, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Chrysanthopoulou et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Di Vaio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e); (Ganesh Kumar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e); (Grigorieva et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Schulp et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Amonkar \u0026amp; Patnaik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Narwane et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Men\u0026eacute;ndez i Molist et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Pawlak \u0026amp; Kołodziejczak, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e); (Allaoui et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOutcomes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eImprovements in Sustainability Performance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eImpact on environmental, economic, and social dimensions\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(L\u0026oacute;pez-Santiago et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Malik et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Mwangi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Rahbari et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Mwangi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Nassar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Hidayat et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Braun et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e); (Zurek et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR69\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Pawlak \u0026amp; Kołodziejczak, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e); (Allaoui et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e); (Le\u0026oacute;n Bravo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e); (Li et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLong-term Trends\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmerging sustainability patterns and practices over time\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Vecchio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e); (Hidayat et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Miar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Narwane et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Zhang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Riptanti et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Nadaraja et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e); (Ababou et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Maesano et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Amonkar \u0026amp; Patnaik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (L\u0026oacute;pez-Santiago et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Chrysanthopoulou et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e); (Mahuwi \u0026amp; Israel, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Chandan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Di Vaio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e); (Mercuri et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e); (Wang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e); (Luzzani et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e); (Lagrasta et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e); (Yadav et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e); (Turner et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e); (Ganesh Kumar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e); (Grigorieva et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e); (Kalungu \u0026amp; Filho, 2018); (Khandker \u0026amp; Thakurata, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese variables were grouped according to four principal capital domains: natural, financial, social, and human capital. This classification allowed for a granular understanding of how different forms of capital interact across diverse agrifood supply chain contexts. Second, interaction mapping was employed to uncover six recurrent capital linkages\u0026mdash;each validated by at least three independent studies. For instance, the linkage from financial to natural capital, such as investments in sustainable land use or irrigation systems, recurs frequently in literature (Braun et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Nayal et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThird, contextual validation was carried out using 12 in-depth case studies. These included localized sustainability interventions such as Hidayat\u0026rsquo;s (2024) study of water recycling systems in Indonesia, which illustrates the co-dependency between natural and human capital. Such validation ensured that the framework is not only theoretically sound but also grounded in practical, real-world scenarios.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.3.2 Theoretical Contributions\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe proposed framework contributes to theory by identifying and modeling dynamic synergies between multiple forms of capital. One notable example is the interaction between social and human capital, where cooperative training programs have been shown to increase the adoption rate of sustainable practices by 22\u0026ndash;40% (Abdelkafi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Riptanti et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). This highlights an amplification effect, wherein joint capital investment yields disproportionately higher outcomes\u0026mdash;an effect not captured by static, single-capital models (Galal \u0026amp; El-Kilany, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoreover, the framework incorporates contextual moderators that influence the effectiveness of capital integration. Policy instruments such as EU agricultural subsidies have been shown to enhance organic certification rates by a factor of 3.2 (Braun et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Conversely, infrastructural limitations, such as insufficient digital access in Tunisia, act as barriers to innovations like blockchain-based traceability systems (Nassar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). These findings underscore the necessity of tailoring capital strategies to regional and institutional contexts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.3.3 Implementation Pathways\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe framework also identifies two primary implementation pathways for multi-capital integration in agrifood supply chains: crisis-responsive and market-driven. The crisis-responsive pathway emphasizes natural capital and its interaction with social capital, particularly in climate resilience strategies. For example, uptake of climate insurance varies dramatically based on levels of social capital\u0026mdash;ranging from just 8% in isolated communities to 62% in networked cooperatives (Davis et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). This suggests that social trust and organizational structure play a crucial role in the adoption of risk mitigation tools.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn contrast, the market-driven pathway focuses on leveraging financial capital through mechanisms such as certification premiums. Premiums averaging 24% are attainable but depend heavily on the presence of aligned social networks that facilitate compliance and access (Nayal et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). This pathway reflects a synergy between financial incentives and social infrastructure, crucial for scaling sustainability initiatives.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.3.4 Framework Visualization\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFigure \u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e provides a visual representation of the Dynamic Multi-Capital Integration Framework. Categories are aligned with the systematic review findings discussed in \u0026sect;\u0026nbsp;5.1.1. The strength of each interaction is indicated by the thickness of arrows, scaled to the number of supporting studies. Case study icons offer empirical grounding, such as the Indonesian water efficiency system (Hidayat, 2024) and Ghanaian shea cooperatives (Abdelkafi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Gray-shaded areas in the diagram indicate understudied intersections, which are explored further in \u0026sect;\u0026nbsp;5.4.1 as potential research frontiers.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e illustrates that sustainability in land-use systems depends on the integration of natural, social, and financial capital, rather than treating them in isolation. The circular or networked design emphasizes dynamic feedback loops\u0026mdash;where investments in one type of capital reinforce or enable others.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"6. Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis systematic literature review offers a thorough examination of sustainability and multi-capital integration within agri-food supply chains, revealing key themes that highlight the necessity for an approach to sustainability. A crucial finding is the geographical imbalance in sustainability research, with a predominance of studies focusing on developed regions such as Europe and North America. These areas benefit from advanced infrastructure, financial resources, and policy support, which facilitate the integration of eco-friendly practices and resilience in agricultural supply chains (Davis et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Nassar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). However, developing regions, including parts of Africa, South America, and Asia, represented in the literature and face distinct challenges such as resource limitations and weaker regulatory frameworks (Ramaswami et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; L\u0026oacute;pez-Santiago et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). The integration of diverse forms of capital natural, financial, social, and human is essential to building sustainable agri-food supply chains. Effective management of natural capital, which includes water, soil, and biodiversity, is crucial for sustaining agricultural productivity (Nassar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Darmaji et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Financial capital allows for investments in sustainable infrastructure, such as efficient irrigation systems and renewable energy, to enhance resilience and reduce environmental impact (Ababou et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; L\u0026oacute;pez-Santiago et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Social capital, encompassing trust, cooperation, and networks among stakeholders, plays a pivotal role in aligning efforts toward common sustainability goals (Ramaswami et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Manikas et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Human capital, including the skills and expertise of the workforce, is fundamental for implementing sustainable practices effectively (Vecchio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Abdelkafi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). In Tunisia, where access to training in sustainable agriculture is limited, building human capital is critical to addressing labor shortages and social inequities in the agrifood sector (Nassar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; L\u0026oacute;pez-Santiago et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Manikas et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTunisia faces a significant challenge when it comes to finding enough workers for labor-intensive tasks in agriculture, such as harvesting crops and taking care of livestock. By focusing on local, Tunisian workers, who are naturally suited to these physical tasks, we can not only fill these critical gaps but also create a positive impact on the economy. When workers earn wages, they spend that money within their communities, which in turn boosts local businesses and strengthens the economy. This cycle, known as the \"multiplier effect,\" helps create a more vibrant local economy and ensures that the agricultural sector contributes to Tunisia's broader economic growth.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoreover, working with local employees brings added benefits in terms of innovation and adaptability. Tunisian workers bring valuable knowledge and insights that can improve the agricultural sector's resilience to challenges like climate change or economic shifts. Their understanding of local conditions and needs is invaluable for making the agrifood system more sustainable and flexible.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThat said, there are still hurdles to overcome. Issues like unclear labor laws, lack of worker protections, and competing priorities among stakeholders could prevent the full potential of the local workforce from realized. It is crucial to address these concerns to ensure that Tunisian workers are not only given jobs but also treated fairly and supported in the end.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e6.1. Challenges and Barriers\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eDespite the clear benefits, there are significant challenges associated with the integration of African immigrants in Tunisia\u0026rsquo;s agrifood supply chain. A major hurdle is the lack of coordinated stakeholder engagement. Different actors in the supply chain farmers, processors, retailers often have competing interests. Farmers may focus on the economic benefits of immigrant labor, while retailers might prioritize ethical sourcing and sustainability certifications (Singh et al., 2023). This gap can prevent the successful integration of immigrants and limit potential gains in terms of productivity and sustainability. To overcome this, Tunisia needs stronger social capital strategies that foster collaboration and mutual trust among all stakeholders, ensuring that the interests of all parties aligned towards common sustainability goals.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurthermore, there are regulatory barriers that must be addressed to ensure the fair and equitable integration of immigrants. Current policies in Tunisia are not always conducive to the legal employment of immigrants, often lacking clear pathways to work permits and labour protections (L\u0026oacute;pez-Santiago et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Without robust regulatory frameworks, immigrants are vulnerable to exploitation, which not only undermines their contributions to the agrifood sector but also creates social tension within communities. Addressing these gaps through regulatory reforms that provide legal protections, fair wages, and opportunities for skill development is crucial for unlocking the full potential of immigrant labour in Tunisia\u0026rsquo;s agrifood sector (Miar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo fully unlock the potential of the workforce in Tunisia's agri-food supply chain, it is essential to implement strategies that address both the economic and social aspects of integration. One important step is to offer vocational training programs tailored specifically to the agri-food sector. These programs will equip workers with the skills they need to enhance their productivity and improve their job prospects (Abdelkafi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Beyond benefiting the supply chain\u0026rsquo;s efficiency, this training will give individuals the opportunity to grow professionally and build a better future for them.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlongside training, it is crucial to run awareness campaigns that highlight the positive contributions of workers, especially in boosting agricultural productivity and enriching cultural diversity (Singh et al., 2023). These campaigns can play a key role in reducing prejudices and encouraging social harmony, helping people see workers as valuable members of the community. Working with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) can also provide further support, offering resources and advocacy for both workers and employers (Shahsavani et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinally, clear and fair regulations are necessary to ensure that workers are integrated in a sustainable and respectful way. Policymakers should focus on creating straightforward processes for legal employment, such as easier access to work permits and stronger labor protections (Miar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). By safeguarding workers' rights, these policies will also help build a stable and reliable labor force, securing the future of Tunisia's agri-food supply chain.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e6.2. Limitations of the Study and implications for Future Research\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study provides valuable insights into the application of multi-capital approaches in agri-food supply chains but also faces several limitations. One notable challenge is the geographical imbalance in the existing literature, with most research focusing on developed regions like Europe and North America. This creates a gap in understanding how these approaches might work in developing regions, such as Tunisia, which face distinct sustainability challenges (Nassar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Amonkar \u0026amp; Patnaik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Another limitation is the lack of longitudinal data in many of the studies. Most offer a snapshot of sustainability practices at a particular point in time, but few explore the long-term effects, making it difficult to assess the durability and evolution of these strategies (Shahsavani et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, methodological inconsistencies, such as varying sample sizes, data collection methods, and analytical techniques, complicate comparisons across studies, hindering the development of universal best practices for sustainability in agri-food systems (Singh et al., 2023).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA significant gap in the literature is the limited focus on social and human capital. Discussions typically prioritize financial and natural capital, while the role of social factors in promoting sustainability remains underexplored (Shahsavani et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). There is also the potential for publication bias, where studies with more favorable outcomes are more likely to be published, possibly leading to an overestimation of the effectiveness of multi-capital strategies (Sinore \u0026amp; Wang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDespite these limitations, the study opens several avenues for future research. More localized studies in developing regions, particularly in Africa, South America, and Southeast Asia, are necessary due to their unique sustainability challenges. In Tunisia, for example, further research could investigate how various forms of capital interact within its agri-food context, particularly focusing on labor dynamics (Zhong et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Longitudinal studies are crucial to understanding the lasting impacts of multi-capital approaches and assessing how they evolve in response to ongoing challenges such as climate change and economic shifts (Laso et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, establishing standardized methodologies across studies could improve comparability, contributing to the development of universal frameworks for integrating sustainability into agri-food supply chains (Braun et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA deeper focus on social and human capital is also increasingly important. Future research should explore how the inclusion of marginalized groups can strengthen social cohesion and economic productivity while addressing social inequities (Nugroho et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Moreover, exploring regulatory frameworks that influence multi-capital integration is essential, especially in developing regions like Tunisia, where different regulatory environments may either support or hinder the effective integration of various capitals (Miar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinally, technological integration presents a promising research area, particularly as digital tools continue to reshape supply chains (Tchonkouang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Investigating the role of digital technologies in supporting multi-capital integration could be valuable, especially for improving productivity and promoting social inclusion in agri-food sectors.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"7. Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis systematic literature review has provided an overview of the current state of research on sustainability and multi-capital integration in agri-food supply chains. While notable progress has been achieved, especially in developed regions, there remain substantial gaps in both research and practical application. Geographic imbalances, limited representation of certain types of capital, and inconsistent engagement of stakeholders continue to present significant challenges.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe study shows that although both academic and industrial sectors are increasingly committed to sustainability, the absence of comprehensive theoretical frameworks and inconsistent policy supports still impede the widespread adoption of multi-capital approaches. To move forward, more region-specific research is needed, along with stronger theoretical foundations and better collaboration among stakeholders.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntegrating sustainability and multi-capital approaches is essential for ensuring the long-term resilience and efficiency of agri-food supply chains. By addressing these challenges through targeted research and policy interventions, the field can continue to make meaningful strides toward achieving global sustainability goals. Recognizing the limitations of this review opens the door for more focused future research, which will address existing gaps and foster sustainable practices across diverse regions and contexts.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eAs this research used only data from the industry experts and academia based on their subjective judgement, no ethical approval was required.\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding:\u003c/strong\u003e No funding was received for conducting this study.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConflict of interest:\u003c/strong\u003e The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData availability:\u003c/strong\u003e The datasets generated and/or analyzed are included in this study.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCode availability:\u003c/strong\u003e Code is available on request due to privacy.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eClinical trial number:\u003c/strong\u003e not applicable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eClinical trial declarations:\u003c/strong\u003e not applicable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent to Publish declaration:\u003c/strong\u003e not applicable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent to Participate declaration:\u003c/strong\u003e not applicable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors\u0026rsquo; contributions:\u003c/strong\u003e Khouloud Dammak: Conceptualization, Visualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Resources, Investigation, Writing-Original draft. Alaeddine Zouari: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision, Project administration, Resources, Writing-Original draft, Review and editing. Lilia Sidhom: Supervision, Project administration, Resources, Review and editing.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgments:\u003c/strong\u003e This work is part/ funded of/by the research project entitled \u0026quot;Smart Models for Agri-Food Local value chain based on Digital technologies for Enabling covid-19 Resilience andSustainability\u0026quot; (SMALLDERS), funded by the PRIMA Program-Section 2 Call multi-topics 2021, through the Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research (Tunisia).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAbabou, M., Chelh, S., \u0026amp; Elhiri, M. (2023). A bibliometric analysis of the literature on Food Industry Supply Chain Resilience: Investigating Key contributors and Global trends. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, 15(11), 8812.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAbdelkafi, N., Xu, J., Pero, M., Ciccullo, F., \u0026amp; Masi, A. (2023). Does the combination of sustainable business model patterns lead to truly sustainable business models? Critical analysis of existing frameworks and extensions. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Business Economics\u003c/em\u003e, 93(4), 597-634. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-023-01140-0\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAllaoui, H., Guo, Y., Choudhary, A., \u0026amp; Bloemhof, J. (2018). Sustainable agro-food supply chain design using two-stage hybrid multi-objective decision-making approach. \u003cem\u003eComputers \u0026amp; Operations Research\u003c/em\u003e, 89, 369-384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2016.10.012\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAmonkar, R.V., \u0026amp; Patnaik, D. (2024). Blockchain In Supply Chain Management: The Case Of Perishable Agricultural Products. \u003cem\u003eAfrican Journal of Biomedical Research\u003c/em\u003e, 27(3S), 1557-1566.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBarid\u0026oacute;n, J.E., \u0026amp; Casas, R.R. (2014). Quality indicators in subtropical soils of Formosa, Argentina: Changes for agriculturization process. \u003cem\u003eInternational Soil and Water Conservation Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e(4), 13-24.https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-6339(15)30054-X\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBerti, G., \u0026amp; Mulligan, C. (2016). Competitiveness of small farms and innovative food supply chains: The role of food hubs in creating sustainable regional and local food systems. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, 8(7), 616. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8070616\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBraun, C.L., Rombach, M., H\u0026auml;ring, A.M., \u0026amp; Bitsch, V. (2018). A local gap in sustainable food procurement: Organic vegetables in Berlin\u0026rsquo;s school meals. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, 10(11), 4245. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10114245\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBukchin, S., \u0026amp; Kerret, D. (2018). Food for hope: The role of personal resources in farmers\u0026rsquo; adoption of green technology. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e(5), 1615. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051615\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCastillo-D\u0026iacute;az, F.J., Belmonte-Ure\u0026ntilde;a, L.J., Batlles-delaFuente, A., \u0026amp; Camacho-Ferre, F. (2023). Impact of Soil Biodisinfection Techniques in Horticultural Crops on Profitability within the Framework of the Circular Economy. \u003cem\u003eHorticulturae\u003c/em\u003e, 9(8), 859. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae9080859\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChandan, A., John, M., \u0026amp; Potdar, V. (2023). Achieving UN SDGs in food supply chain using blockchain technology. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, 15(3), 2109. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032109\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChrysanthopoulou, F., Lameris, M., Greil, G., Vudragovic, D., \u0026amp; Flynn, K. (2022). An online innovation platform to promote collaboration and sustainability in short food supply chains. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Food Studies\u003c/em\u003e, 11, SI232-SI247. https://doi.org/10.7455/ijfs/11.SI.2022.a9\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDarmaji, C.S., Utami, M.M.D., Firdaus, M.I., Purwoko, D., \u0026amp; Umami, M.R. (2024). Structure Requirements for Developing the Insurance Program Adoption for the Rice Farming Business in Banyuwangi Regency. \u003cem\u003eAgricultural Science Digest-A Research Journal\u003c/em\u003e, 44(Of), 787-793. http://dx.doi.org/10.18805/ag.DF-610\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDavis, K.F., Downs, S., \u0026amp; Gephart, J.A. (2021). Towards food supply chain resilience to environmental shocks. \u003cem\u003eNature Food,\u003c/em\u003e 2, 54-65. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-020-00196-3\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDi Vaio, A., Boccia, F., Landriani, L., \u0026amp; Palladino, R. (2020). Artificial intelligence in the agri-food system: Rethinking sustainable business models in the COVID-19 scenario. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, 12(12), 4851. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12124851\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGalal, N.M., \u0026amp; El-Kilany, K.S. (2016). Sustainable agri-food supply chain with uncertain demand and lead time. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Simulation Modelling\u003c/em\u003e, 15(3), 485-496. DOI:10.2507/IJSIMM15(3)8.350\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGanesh Kumar, C., Murugaiyan, P., Madanmohan, G. (2017). Agri-food supply chain management: literature review. \u003cem\u003eIntelligent Information Management\u003c/em\u003e, 9, 68-96 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGava, O., Bartolini, F., Venturi, F., Brunori, G., Zinnai, A., \u0026amp; Pardossi, A. (2018). A Reflection of the Use of the Life Cycle Assessment Tool for Agri-Food Sustainability. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(1), 71. doi:10.3390/su11010171\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGrigorieva, E., Livenets, A., Stelmakh, E. (2023). Adaptation of agriculture to climate change: Ascoping review. \u003cem\u003eClimate\u003c/em\u003e, 11(10), 202 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHidayat, A. S., Managanta, A. A., Purwanto, P., \u0026amp; Nurjati, E. (2024). The link between collaborative advantage and productivity: Evidence from smallholder cocoa producers in Indonesia. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development\u003c/em\u003e, 8(8), 4936.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/su12052052.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKakraliya, S.K., Jat, H.S., Singh, I., Sapkota, T.B., Singh, L.K., Sutaliya, J.M., ... \u0026amp; Jat, M.L. (2018). Performance of portfolios of climate smart agriculture practices in a rice-wheat system of western Indo-Gangetic plains. \u003cem\u003eAgricultural Water Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e202\u003c/em\u003e, 122-133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2018.02.020\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKalungu, J. W., \u0026amp; Leal Filho, W. (2018). Adoption of appropriate technologies among smallholder farmers in Kenya. \u003cem\u003eClimate and Development\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e(1), 84-96.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKassam, A., Friedrich, T., \u0026amp; Derpsch, R. (2019). Global spread of conservation agriculture. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Environmental Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e76\u003c/em\u003e(1), 29-51. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207233.2018.1494927\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKhandker, V., \u0026amp; Thakurata, I. (2018). Factors encouraging complete adoption of agricultural technologies: the case of hybrid rice cultivation in India. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e8\u003c/em\u003e(2), 270-287. https://doi.org/10.1108/JADEE-05-2016-0037\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLagrasta, F. P., Pontrandolfo, P., \u0026amp; Scozzi, B. (2021). Circular economy business models for the Tanzanian coffee sector: A teaching case study. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, 13(24), 13931. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132413931\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLaso, J., Hoehn, D., Margallo, M., Garc\u0026iacute;a-Herrero, I., Batlle-Bayer, L., Bala, A., ... \u0026amp; Aldaco, R. (2018). Assessing energy and environmental efficiency of the Spanish agri-food system using the LCA/DEA methodology. \u003cem\u003eEnergies\u003c/em\u003e, 11(12), 3395. https://doi.org/10.3390/en11123395\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLe\u0026oacute;n Bravo, V., Moretto, A., \u0026amp; Caniato, F. (2021). A roadmap for sustainability assessment in the food supply chain. \u003cem\u003eBritish Food Journal\u003c/em\u003e, 123(13), 199-220. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-04-2020-0293\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLi, D., Wang, X., Chan, H. K., \u0026amp; Manzini, R. (2014). Sustainable food supply chain management. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Production Economics\u003c/em\u003e, 152, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.04.003\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eL\u0026oacute;pez-Santiago, J., Md Som, A., Asyadi Bin Md Yusof, F., Mazarr\u0026oacute;n, F. R., \u0026amp; G\u0026oacute;mez-Villarino, M. T. (2024). Exploring Sustainability in Wineries: Evaluating Food Safety and Environmental Management Aligning with the Farm to Fork Strategy. \u003cem\u003eAgriculture\u003c/em\u003e, 14(3), 330.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLuzzani, G., Grandis, E., Frey, M., \u0026amp; Capri, E. (2021). Blockchain technology in wine chain for collecting and addressing sustainable performance: An exploratory study. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, 13(22), 12898\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMaesano, G., Milani, M., Nicolosi, E., D\u0026rsquo;Amico, M., \u0026amp; Chinnici, G. (2022). A network analysis for environmental assessment in wine supply chain. \u003cem\u003eAgronomy\u003c/em\u003e, 12(1), 211. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12010211\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMahuwi, L., \u0026amp; Israel, B. (2023). Supply chain issues affecting market access among smallholder maize farmers in mbozi district, Tanzania. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Food and Agricultural Economics (IJFAEC)\u003c/em\u003e, 11(2), 115-129.http://dx.doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.334710\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMalik, A., Lafortune, G., Dahir, S., Wendling, Z.A., Kroll C, Carter, S., Li, M., Lenzen, M. (2023). Global environmental and social spillover effects of EU\u0026rsquo;s food trade. \u003cem\u003eGlobal Sustainability\u003c/em\u003e, 6, e6, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2023.4\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMangla, S.K., Luthra, S., Rich, N., Kumar, D., Rana, N.P., \u0026amp; Dwivedi, Y.K. (2018). Enablers to implement sustainable initiatives in agri-food supply chains. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Production Economics\u003c/em\u003e, 203, 379-393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.07.012\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eManikas, I., Sundarakani, B., Anastasiadis, F., \u0026amp; Ali, B. (2022). A framework for food security via resilient agri-food supply chains: The case of UAE. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, 14(10), 6375. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14106375\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMen\u0026eacute;ndez i Molist, A., Kallas, Z., \u0026amp; Guadarrama Fuentes, O.V. (2024). Assessing the Downstream and Upstream Preferences of Stakeholders for Sustainability Attributes in the Tomato Value Chain. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, 16(6), 2505.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMercuri, F., della Corte, G., \u0026amp; Ricci, F. (2021). Blockchain technology and sustainable business models: A case study of Devoleum. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, 13(10), 5619. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13105619\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMiar, M., Rizani, A., Pardede, R., \u0026amp; Basrowi, B. (2024). Analysis of the effects of capital expenditure and supply chain on economic growth and their implications on the community welfare of districts and cities in central Kalimantan province. \u003cem\u003eUncertain Supply Chain Management\u003c/em\u003e, 12(1), 489-504. DOI: 10.5267/j.uscm.2023.9.003\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMizik, T. (2023). How can precision farming work on a small scale? A systematic literature review. \u003cem\u003ePrecision agriculture\u003c/em\u003e, 24(1), 384-406 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMoreno-Miranda, C., Pilamala, A., Molina, I., Cerda-Mej\u0026iacute;a, L., Moreno-Miranda, R., \u0026amp; Rama, D. (2020). An assessment of emerging networks in the fruit sector: The case of inca berry in Ecuador. \u003cem\u003eAfrican Journal of Food, Agriculture, Nutrition and Development\u003c/em\u003e, 20(1), 15365-15382.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMwangi, G.M., Despoudi, S., Espindola, O.R., Spanaki, K., Papadopoulos, T. (2022). A planetary boundaries perspective on the sustainability: resilience relationship in the Kenyan tea supply chain. \u003cem\u003eAnnals of operations research\u003c/em\u003e, 319(1), 661-695 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNadaraja, D., Lu, C., \u0026amp; Islam, M. M. (2021). The sustainability assessment of plantation agriculture-a systematic review of sustainability indicators. \u003cem\u003eSustainable Production and Consumption\u003c/em\u003e, 26, 892-910.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNaik, G., \u0026amp; Suresh, D.N. (2018). Challenges of creating sustainable agri-retail supply chains. \u003cem\u003eIIMB management review\u003c/em\u003e, 30(3), 270-282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iimb.2018.04.001\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNarwane, V.S., Gunasekaran, A., \u0026amp; Gardas, B.B. (2022). Unlocking adoption challenges of IoT in Indian agricultural and food supply chain. \u003cem\u003eSmart Agricultural Technology\u003c/em\u003e, 2, 100035. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atech.2022.100035\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNassar, S., T\u0026oacute;th, Z. N., \u0026amp; Vasa, L. (2023). Economic empowerment as a result of achieving SDGs with resource access: A comparative research between Gaza Strip and Hungary. \u003cem\u003eJournal of International Studies\u003c/em\u003e, 16(2), 9-33.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNayal, K., Raut, R.D., Narkhede, B.E., Priyadarshinee, P., Panchal, G.B., \u0026amp; Gedam, V.V. (2023). Antecedents for blockchain technology-enabled sustainable agriculture supply chain. \u003cem\u003eAnnals of operations research\u003c/em\u003e, 327(1), 293-337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-021-04423-3\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNugroho, A.D., Istvan, F., Fekete-Farkas, M., \u0026amp; Lakner, Z. (2022). How to improve agricultural value-added in the MENA region? Implementation of Diamond Porter\u0026apos;s theory in agriculture. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Sustainable Food Systems\u003c/em\u003e, 6, 956701. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2022.956701\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOgilvy, S. (2015). Developing the ecological balance sheet for agricultural sustainability. Sustainability unting, \u003cem\u003eManagement and Policy Journal\u003c/em\u003e, 6(2), 110-137.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePage, K. L., Dang, Y. P., \u0026amp; Dalal, R. C. (2020). The ability of conservation agriculture to conserve soil organic carbon and the subsequent impact on soil physical, chemical, and biological properties and yield. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in sustainable food systems\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e4\u003c/em\u003e, 31. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2020.00031\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePawlak, K., \u0026amp; Kołodziejczak, M. (2020). The role of agriculture in ensuring food security in developing countries: Considerations in the context of the problem of sustainable food production. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, 12(13), 5488.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRahbari, M., Khamseh, A.A., \u0026amp; Mohammadi, M. (2023). A novel multi-objective robust fuzzy stochastic programming model for sustainable agri-food supply chain: case study from an emerging economy. \u003cem\u003eEnvironmental Science and Pollution Research\u003c/em\u003e, 30(25), 67398-67442.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRaimbekov, Z., Syzdykbayeva, B., Rakhmetulina, A., Rakhmetulina, Z., Abylaikhanova, T., Ordabayeva, M., \u0026amp; Doltes, L. (2023). The Impact of Agri-Food Supply Channels on the Efficiency and Links in Supply Chains. \u003cem\u003eEconomies\u003c/em\u003e, 11(8), 206. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies11080206.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRamaswami, A., Boyer, D., Nagpure, A.S., Fang, A., Bogra, S., Bakshi, B., ... \u0026amp; Rao-Ghorpade, A. (2017). An urban systems framework to assess the trans-boundary food-energy-water nexus: implementation in Delhi, India. \u003cem\u003eEnvironmental Research Letters\u003c/em\u003e, 12(2), 025008. DOI 10.1088/1748-9326/aa5556\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRiptanti, E. W., Irianto, H., Widiyanti, E., \u0026amp; Prasetyo, A. (2024). Inclusivity in the sustainability of micro and small enterprises based on digital technology: A case study in central Java, Indonesia. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development\u003c/em\u003e, 8(9), 8300. https://doi.org/10.24294/jipd.v8i9.8300\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSchulp, C.J., Komossa, F., Scherer, L., Van Der Zanden, E.H., Debolini, M., \u0026amp; Piorr, A. (2022). The role of different types of actors in the future of sustainable agriculture in a Dutch peri-urban area. \u003cem\u003eEnvironmental Management\u003c/em\u003e, 70(3), 401-419\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShahsavani, I., Goli, A., \u0026amp; Hajiaghaei-Keshteli, M. (2024). A circular economy approach to design a citrus supply chain network. \u003cem\u003eAnnals of Operations Research\u003c/em\u003e, (in press). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-024-05829-5\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSiebrecht, N. (2020). Sustainable agriculture and its implementation gap\u0026mdash;Overcoming obstacles to implementation. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(9), 3853. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093853\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSims, B., \u0026amp; Heney, J. (2017). Promoting smallholder adoption of conservation agriculture through mechanization services. \u003cem\u003eAgriculture\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e7\u003c/em\u003e(8), 64.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSingh, K., Abraham, R., Yadav, J., Agrawal, A.K., Kolar, P., Misra, M., \u0026amp; Yadav, A. (2024). Analysis of barriers for sustainable agro-food supply chain: an interpretive structural modeling and MICMAC approach. \u003cem\u003eEnvironment, Development and Sustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e26\u003c/em\u003e(10), 25311-25333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-03680\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSinore, T., Wang, F. (2024). Impact of climate change on agriculture and adaptation strategies in Ethiopia: A meta-analysis. \u003cem\u003eHeliyon\u003c/em\u003e, 10, e26103 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTchonkouang, R.D., Onyeaka, H., \u0026amp; Nkoutchou, H. (2024). Assessing the vulnerability of food supply chains to climate change-induced disruptions. \u003cem\u003eScience of the Total Environment\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e920\u003c/em\u003e, 171047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.171047\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTurner, I., Smart, A., Adams, E., \u0026amp; Pelletier, N. (2020). Building an ILCD/EcoSPOLD2\u0026ndash;compliant data-reporting template with application to Canadian agri-food LCI data. \u003cem\u003eThe International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment\u003c/em\u003e, 25, 1402-1417. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-020-01748-2\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVecchio, Y., Iddrisu, A. L., Adinolfi, F., \u0026amp; De Rosa, M. (2020). Geographical indication to build up resilient rural economies: A case study from Ghana. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(5), 2052.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWang, J., Liu, T., Liu, Q., \u0026amp; Liu, X. (2024). Does trade credit facilitate high-quality development in agricultural enterprises?\u0026ndash;Insights from Chinese enterprises. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Sustainable Food Systems\u003c/em\u003e, 8, 1396739. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2024.1396739\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eW\u0026uuml;nsche, J.F., \u0026amp; Fernqvist, F. (2022). The potential of blockchain technology in the transition towards sustainable food systems. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, 14(13), 7739. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14137739\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYadav, S., Luthra, S., \u0026amp; Garg, D. (2021). Modelling Internet of things (IoT)-driven global sustainability in multi-tier agri-food supply chain under natural epidemic outbreaks. \u003cem\u003eEnvironmental Science and Pollution Research\u003c/em\u003e, 28(13), 16633-16654. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-11676-1\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhang, Z., Yan, Q., Zheng, H., Zeng, M., \u0026amp; Chen, Y. (2024). Little Brands, Big Profits? Effect of Agricultural Geographical Indicators on County-Level Economic Development in China. \u003cem\u003eAgriculture\u003c/em\u003e, 14(5), 767. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14050767\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhong, J., Cheng, H., \u0026amp; Jia, F. (2024). Supply chain resilience capability factors in agri-food supply chains. \u003cem\u003eOperations Management Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e17\u003c/em\u003e(3), 850-868. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12063-024-00470-8\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZurek, M., Ingram, J., Sanderson Bellamy, A., Goold, C., Lyon, C., Alexander, P., ...Withers, P. J. (2022). Food system resilience: concepts, issues, and challenges. \u003cem\u003eAnnual Review of Environment and Resources\u003c/em\u003e, 47, 511-534 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"sustainability, multi-capital integration, agri-food systems, climate resilience, equitable transitions","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6115997/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6115997/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThe transition toward sustainable agri-food supply chains demands holistic strategies that harmonize environmental stewardship, economic viability, and social equity. Grounding our analysis in a systematic review of 75 peer-reviewed studies (2014\u0026ndash;2024), we reveal how multi-capital integration the dynamic interplay of natural, financial, social, and human capitals\u0026mdash;propels sustainability forward. Natural capital emerges as the bedrock of resilient systems, yet its potential remains untapped in developing economies due to fragmented policies and chronic underinvestment. Financial capital acts as the linchpin for scaling sustainable technologies, though persistent barriers curtail smallholders' access. Social capital\u0026rsquo;s transformative power manifests through robust producer networks, yet hinges on cultivating trust amidst competing interests. Human capital shines as the catalyst for innovation, with targeted training programs yielding measurable upticks (up to 40%) in sustainable adoption rates. Our synthesis crystallizes three pivotal contributions: (1) an integrative framework mapping capital synergies, (2) evidence-based policy levers for resource-constrained regions, and (3) a clarion call for metrics that capture social and human capital\u0026rsquo;s intangible dividends. Despite glaring disparities in research focus (72% centered on affluent economies), our findings illuminate actionable pathways to orchestrate inclusive, climate-smart agri-food systems.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Sustainability and Multi-Capital Integration in Agri-Food Supply Chains: A Comprehensive Systematic Review","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-04-23 10:47:57","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6115997/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"8326b8a6-9873-4613-84c3-c993e9f37c5f","owner":[],"postedDate":"April 23rd, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-04-28T12:08:45+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-04-23 10:47:57","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-6115997","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-6115997","identity":"rs-6115997","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}