Assessing food systems funders’ use of data and evidence to make funding decisions

Abstract

Although academic journals are often considered to be reliable sources of evidence for informing practice, the extent to which funders turn to them to shape their decisions is unclear. We carried out a survey to examine the types of evidence and knowledge that food systems funders use—and need—to make informed decisions, and to under­stand how research, particularly from journal publications, is or is not informing food systems investments. The majority of the 19 respondents worked for private foundations or community-based nonprofits that offer grants, loans, or other program-related investments to U.S.-based initia­tives focused on local food, sustainable agriculture, and food access. Many respondents indicated that they draw primarily on local stakeholders and grantees to make funding decisions and do not prioritize scientific knowledge or externally derived evidence. For most, peer-reviewed academic journals, including the Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development (JAFSCD), are one of the last places they currently turn to for information that could shape their funding priori­ties. In other sections of the survey, however, respondents indicated that they value utilizing a blend of scientific research and local knowledge. Only four respondents require grantees or bor­rowers to carry out formal evaluations, and over a third of respondents are not satisfied with how their organization uses data and evidence to make decisions. They suggested a variety of ways that research could be made more accessible and rele­vant to them as funders and investors in the food systems arena. We suggest various ways that more comprehensive research could be conducted to study what drives the decision-making processes of the diverse U.S. food systems funding community.