UK food system transformation is urgently needed, but to date, minimal research has investigated ‘blue foods’ probably because they are ethically nuanced. There exists a paradox whereby materially deprived communities should be eating more fish to meet nutritional requirements, yet there is a global ‘red flag’ around global overfishing. New collaborative and creative solutions are, therefore, needed to tackle such food system inequities. By working together, all voices can be equally heard when decisions are being made to improve the system. Similarly, innovation and disruption of established supply chains will enable better access to healthy, affordable and tasty food that will support better nutrition, health and wellbeing. This review paper will present a critique of the ‘The Plymouth Fish Finger’ as a collaborative social innovation case study. Part of the FoodSEqual research project, this exploratory pilot project championed ‘co-production’ approaches to achieve multiple (potential) impacts. This review will critically explore how this social innovation case study has exemplified the complex interplay between factors driving distortions in access to and availability of fish within the local food system. Through collaborative multi-stakeholder (transdisciplinary) processes, using participatory creative methods, new strategies and recommendations for research, practice, action and policy are informed, all of which offer great potential for progressive and transformative systemic (blue) food system change.

The European Union relies on decentralised agencies to implement important transnational regulations, such as certifying the safety of medicines. However, the authority of these agencies does not have ‘hard’ legal status and crucially depends on disseminating ideas and information effectively: what can be termed ‘political entrepreneurship’. This article provides the first comprehensive analysis of the political entrepreneurship of EU agencies by constructing a conceptual typology of entrepreneurial strategies. Drawing conceptually on transnational public administration, a new database is constructed of the ‘entrepreneurship’ of 33 EU agencies in 2014 based on their media communication activities, face‐to‐face networking in workshops and collaborations, and knowledge dissemination and ‘learning’ exercises. This is mapped against the political salience of agencies in the European Parliament and media. The mapping exercise shows four types of entrepreneurial strategies covering the population of EU agencies: technical functional, insulating, network‐seeking and politicised. The typology is validated through semi‐structured interviews in 11 EU agencies, showing the core characteristics of each type of strategy. The article concludes by arguing that this typology provides an important addition to existing categories of EU agencies based on autonomy and accountability, and advocates a future research strategy examining the interaction between agencies’ entrepreneurial strategies and the expectations and reactions of stakeholder audiences.

International nongovernmental organizations (INGOs) are frequently criticized for failing to adequately represent or engage with grassroots stakeholders. Yet most explanations of this shortcoming have focused on factors external to the organizations, e.g., economic pressures that privilege donor interests. What has been largely lacking is an examination of the role of internal INGO characteristics. We address this by examining INGOs’ legitimacy standards: how INGOs understand themselves to be doing the right thing and seek to convey that righteousness to others. Drawing on the literature from business ethics and organizational behavior, we show that organizations’ self-selected standards of legitimacy are key drivers of behavior. Using an analysis of 57 American INGO websites, we identify 11 legitimacy types and examine their usage. We find that while most INGOs make a series of technical legitimacy claims that seem designed to attract donors, they simultaneously employ additional legitimacy standards that do not seem to be externally dictated. These additional standards generally prioritize adherence to a cause rather than stakeholder input. The findings suggest that challenges to INGO representivity or responsiveness result not only from external pressures, but also from INGOs’ own choice of values.

Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) play a critical role in the response to human displacement yet face competing pressures. One ongoing site of displacement is among the 1.1 million Rohingya persons living in refugee camps in Bangladesh. NGOs are party to the ongoing humanitarian response yet operate under competing demands by multiple stakeholders. To what extent do NGOs meet the various expectations among different groups of Rohingya refugee beneficiary stakeholders? We used UNHCR survey data from 31 refugee sites in Cox’s Bazar to empirically examine the relationship between demographic and socioeconomic indicators with satisfaction levels of service provision. We find that female refugees and head of household disability (difficulty seeing, hearing, walking, remembering, or communicating) are indicators that present the most significant differences; NGO responses more often overlook the priority needs of females and persons with disabilities when compared to other refugees, a response gap that reduces their satisfaction and potentially heightens these groups’ vulnerabilities. Although UNHCR and NGOs face pressures from competing demands within beneficiary populations, they also have opportunities to develop refugee-centered policies and practices that are more responsive to vulnerable groups. Overall, this paper adds dimension to understanding of various refugee stakeholder perspectives within a camp setting.

The governance of civil society organizations (CSOs) is a crucial determinant of organizational legitimacy, accountability, and performance. International nongovernmental organizations (INGOs) are a subtype of CSOs and have received a lot of attention as actors in global governance. Research suggests that INGOs can follow a membership model, where the board is elected by the membership, or a board-managed model, where the board is appointed to represent major stakeholders. Following resource dependency theory, we argue that the choice between these two models depends on the INGOs different sources of funding and the degree of volunteer involvement: As donors and volunteers provide important resources, they are in turn granted the right to nominate board members or to sit on the board. In our quantitative study we show that individual members, regional member organizations, and governmental donors hold a stronger position in the governance of INGOs than philanthropists, foundations and volunteers. Our results inform research on CSO governance by highlighting the relevance of board nomination modes and by showing how CSOs can incorporate stakeholders into their governance mechanisms.

The long-term performance of NPOs is based on their ability to link and maximize social value as defined in their mission. This involves legitimacy obtained from stakeholders influenced by and influencing NPO activities, and their operational capacity or economic efficiency. Thus, NPOs have to utilize multiple level accountability systems which should be compatible with their multiple objectives and stakeholders’ claims. The accountability system of an NPO should focus on its operational capacity, because in order to maximize its efficiency, an NPO has to measure its resource use, cost structure, and financial structure. Legitimacy obtained from stakeholders is also integral. If an organization is considered a social contract between multiple stakeholders, it has to consider the social economic effects of its activities and it has the duty to account for them. However, since the mission of an NPO is to create and distribute social value to a certain specific group, its social value creation has the most important role and an NPO should measure the social value it has created. This article analyzes the accountability system of a specific type of Italian NPO called Centri di Servizio per il Volontariato (CSVs)—namely centers which provide services for voluntary associations. The aim of the research is to verify if the accountability system adopted by CSVs satisfies their need for multiple level information (operational, legitimacy, and social value) and accomplishes their stakeholder claims, and to determine its impact on the definition and implementation of their strategy and on their long-term performance. The research was carried out using the action research model, and the findings are based on the analysis of a sample of 64 CSVs situated throughout Italy.

This article focuses on the nexus between the governance of U.S. nonprofit organizations and their ability to secure the resources necessary to effectively execute their missions. Different sources of nonprofit income are associated with alternative stakeholders. Viewing these constituencies as beneficiary groups, we consider how the particular mix of income sources influences the capacity of nonprofits to generate resources, especially if there is competition among stakeholder groups for control of the organization’s policies and practices. We then ask how nonprofit governance might be modified to improve the ability of the organization to generate resources through a regime of economic stakeholder governance.

Why do nonprofit organizations exist? From an economic perspective, a number of major theories have been proposed to explain their existence. However, when exploring determinants of nonprofit sector density, one needs to take into account that demand and supply factors operate simultaneously and that it is difficult to separate them. By using a stakeholder approach, we develop a more integrative framework for understanding variations in nonprofit sector density. We test this framework by investigating determinants of nonprofit sector density in Texas at the county level.

While prototype testing with stakeholders is key for valuable feedback in iterative design, there is limited research on how novice designers, who lack the relevant experience, solicit meaningful feedback. This paper analyzes 30 prototype testing sessions from five student design teams to understand how novices structure their testing time by identifying and reporting the instances of testing interactions and types of questions within different contexts. Initial findings show that novices effectively set up testing, engage in active listening, and ask more close-ended follow-up questions. However, they rarely conclude sessions, seek stakeholder questions, and use fewer leading questions in later testing sessions. This preliminary understanding highlights opportunities to strengthen novices’ skills in prototype testing and how testing approaches affect stakeholder feedback quality.