Participatory guarantee systems (PGS) are locally-rooted agroecological governance mechanisms primarily designed to meet the needs of local producers for product certification and cooperative sales. They have experienced periodic waves of interest in different places throughout the globe. There is a small but rich and growing scholarship devoted to understanding how they are managed, how they are sustained, and what factors predict their success. Interestingly, there is little evidence that they have developed in the United States, which has instead, witnessed the growth of community supported agriculture (CSA), farmer’s markets, food hubs and food policy councils (FPC), although many of these mechanisms have failed to sustain interest and support. Here, we explore the factors that drive the creation of systems in the global South, Europe and other regions, and identify the factors that shape a different trajectory for local agriculture in the United States. We discuss the possibilities for more radical food system transformation in the United States, considering a changing climate, an industrial food system that has prioritized profit over health, and the COVID-19 pandemic. Finally, we conclude by identifying some future pathways for policy reform and research opportunities.

As has become abundantly clear to the social scientists, agriculturalists, policymakers, and food justice advocates who have taken up the fight, progress toward more resilient, fair, and effective food systems is hard fought and prone to challenges. Vexingly, the competing goals of food system improvement even make defining “success” in food system transformation difficult: accessible, affordable food versus nutritious food; diversity in the agricultural economy versus the cost savings of consolidation; and consumer choice and variety versus the ecological advantages of eating seasonally and locally. In this commentary, we treat American college campuses as analogs of the larger food system and as such, laboratories^[1] for study of these systemic tradeoffs and proving grounds for policy interventions. We argue that the lived context of college students approximates that of communities in which financial, logistical, and other challenges negatively affect nutrition, equitable food access, and food knowledge outcomes. We suggest that the rigorous assessment of changes in educational philosophy, management practices, and spending priorities on campuses may offer insight into the ways in which we might effect change throughout the broad national food landscape, to facilitate the transition to more equitable and just food systems. ^[1] Our propositions here connect more broadly with the literature examining the campus as a living laboratory, which addresses a wide array of sustainability issues (e.g., Gomez & Derr, 2021; Hansen, 2017; Save et al., 2021).

Network approaches to collaborative leadership suggest that local leaders’ success depends on activities that connect their organization to diverse stakeholders and resources. Drawing on the literature on managerial networking and a mixed-methods approach that includes 38 semi-structured interviews and a survey of 185 New York State municipal leaders, we explore the impact of leaders’ networking efforts on food access and security in their communities. We hypothesize that different forms of leaders’ social capital (bridging, bonding, and linking) has an impact on policy success. Our results suggest that only bridging social capital has an impact on food access. We conclude with some suggestions for future research and offer policy recommendations.

This article explores how improvisation, role-play, and generative AI can be used to reimagine public policy education through active, experiential learning. Many students drawn to policy studies arrive with backgrounds in creative disciplines and thrive in collaborative, problem-solving environments. By incorporating hands-on methods such as simulations and improvisational role-play, the classroom becomes a space where students not only analyze policy dilemmas but also inhabit them, allowing them to grapple with complexity, ambiguity, and competing perspectives. Drawing on two case studies, this article demonstrates how experiential strategies, supported by generative AI for rapid scenario development, can enhance engagement, critical thinking, and collaborative problem-solving. Rather than using AI merely to streamline preparation, the approach leverages AI’s generative capacities to support adaptive, in-the-moment teaching that mirrors the dynamic nature of real-world policy work. The article foregrounds improvisation not only as a teaching technique but as a democratic stance, inviting co-creation, responsiveness, and a willingness to embrace uncertainty. While challenges remain in assessing learning outcomes and managing pedagogical risks, this work contributes to broader conversations about creativity, equity, and innovation in public policy education. It offers an adaptable framework that equips students to meet the demands of policymaking with agility, imagination, and empathy.