Industrial food systems—large-scale, corporate-driven production of processed foods—are expanding rapidly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This trend raises concerns about public health, environmental damage, and economic inequality, as small farmers struggle to compete. The core challenge is understanding how these systems gain footholds, whether through government subsidies, corporate deals, or other incentives. Without this knowledge, efforts to promote healthier, sustainable alternatives may fall short.

Unpacking the Pathways of Expansion

One way to approach this issue is by investigating two key drivers of industrial food growth in LMICs:

• Government subsidies: Financial support from LMIC governments to large agribusinesses, often under the guise of economic development or food security.
• Corporate negotiations: Backroom deals between multinational food companies and local governments to ease regulations, secure tax breaks, or build infrastructure.

For example, a country might subsidize imported palm oil for processed snacks, undercutting local vegetable oil producers. Alternatively, a soda company might lobby for looser advertising restrictions in schools. By mapping these tactics, it could become clearer where to intervene.

From Research to Real-World Impact

The findings could empower several groups:

• Public health advocates could push back against harmful policies.
• Farmers’ collectives could demand fairer subsidy allocations.
• Policymakers might reconsider trade-offs between short-term profits and long-term costs like healthcare burdens.

To test assumptions—like whether subsidies disproportionately benefit corporations—one could analyze budget records, corporate financial disclosures, and health outcome data across different regions. Local partnerships would be crucial, as grassroots organizations often have insights into opaque dealmaking.

Navigating Challenges and Opportunities

Corporate resistance and political short-termism pose hurdles, but a few strategies could help:

First, building coalitions with international NGOs could amplify pressure. Second, highlighting success stories—like regions where agroecology boosted incomes and nutrition—might sway policymakers. Finally, framing industrial food dependence as a fiscal liability (e.g., future diabetes costs) could make alternatives more appealing.

While similar work exists, focusing specifically on subsidy flows and corporate backchannel deals in LMICs could reveal unique leverage points. The goal wouldn’t just be to critique the current system, but to provide a roadmap for shifting resources toward healthier, more equitable food economies.