Frontiers in Research

Seeds of food sovereignty: AI, drones, and the fight against innovation Apartheid in Africa’s climate-smart agriculture

Simon Suwanzy Dzreke — 2025-07-01

This groundbreaking study asks whether AI and drone technologies can help feed Africa’s future in a humane way, showing that they have the potential to make a big difference but are held back by systemic inequalities. The study document shows real benefits through a mixed-methods analysis: Kenyan smallholder yields went up by 28.7% and dietary diversity went up by 22% thanks to Apollo Agriculture’s credit-linked platform. South African orchards saved 35% on irrigation costs thanks to Aerobotics’ precision analytics. But these gains are still harvests of exclusion: 68% of resource-poor farmers can’t afford the costs (more than $200/ha), and digital literacy barriers (OR=0.42) take away people’s ability to act. Algorithmic betrayal hurts people who own degraded land (less than 10% of the gains), which keeps colonial legacies alive that take away the dignity of customary land stewards. Regulatory dissonance (Kenya’s 47-day drone permits shrinking crisis coverage by 41%) is an example of how bureaucratic indifference puts people’s lives at risk during climate shocks. It’s important to note that 78% of female farmers say that tools don’t work with the way they work, which shows gendered design violence. Three revolutions will lead to redemption: sociotechnical congruence that respects oral knowledge traditions, algorithms that are made with communities to avoid bias, and policy harmonization that puts smallholder sovereignty at the center. These technologies can only become seeds of food sovereignty instead of tools of division if they are designed to be fair, with governments paying for digital literacy programs for women, developers making voice-native interfaces, and donors paying for offline analytics. Without this moral reset, innovation could make the problems it promised to solve even worse, putting human dignity at risk on the climate frontier.

Feminist foreign policy as a new approach to peaceful resolutions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia conflicts in Georgia

Gunel Madadli — 2025-07-11

The paper explores the current strategies and peaceful resolution processes as well as the state response to territorial conflicts in Georgia and democracy, the rule of law, and the rights of internally displaced persons (IDPs). Conflicts over the status of Abkhazia and South Ossetia resulted in two full-scale wars in 1991 and 2008, with the demand for secession from Georgia and international recognition of independence. The peace talks negotiated by the different international organizations over decades have not achieved any significant solution to resolve the issue. Therefore, there is a need for a new approach to investigate the benefits of Feminist Foreign Policy (FFP) directions in conflict resolution to look at Georgian territorial conflicts from a different perspective. The purpose of this research is to analyze the potential application of FFP in addressing the conflicts over Abkhazia and South Ossetia in Georgia. By examining FFP's principles and their alignment with Georgia's National Security Concept (NSC) and engagement policy, the study seeks to uncover innovative approaches to conflict resolution that prioritize inclusivity, equality, and gender-sensitive strategies. The analysis illustrates that the Georgian National Security Concept encourages only peaceful solutions to the conflict, and there is a possibility of including the FFP features in the foreign policy strategies of Georgia. The research investigates peace and security matters in the context of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, such as human rights, democracy, and the rule of law in the perceptions of IDPs to answer the questions of the applicability of FFP to the resolution of violent clashes in Georgia.

The fragility of efficiency: How lean inventory strategies amplify supply chain crisis losses – a $2.3 trillion analysis of geopolitical shocks across 1,864 manufacturing firms

Simon Suwanzy Dzreke — 2025-07-13

This research uncovers a critical vulnerability in global manufacturing: conventional lean inventory solutions excel under stable circumstances but markedly exacerbate losses during supply chain disturbances. A quantitative examination of more than 1,800 enterprises during 12 significant geopolitical events—including the Russia-Ukraine war, COVID-19 lockdowns, and the Suez Canal blockage—reveals that inadequate inventory buffers resulted in $2.3 trillion in preventable global losses. Regression research reveals that firms with Days Inventory Outstanding below sustainable norms had revenue decreases 3.2 times larger than robust enterprises, losing 18.7% compared to 5.9%. Recovery periods were 47% extended, and stock price volatility rose by 32%. The paper presents Inventory Risk Elasticity (IRE), a novel metric for assessing fragility, defined as the percentage change in financial or operational losses resulting from a disruption for each 1% decrease in inventory buffers within an industry-specific resilience threshold. Econometric models indicate that each 10% reduction in inventory, beyond operational thresholds—resulting in a 10% rise in Inventory Risk Exposure—escalates crisis losses by 19%, illustrating a quantifiable fragility multiplier. The empirically-derived RESCUE Protocol, integrating risk-adjusted buffers, supplier diversity, and predictive analytics, decreases losses by 58–81% while preserving 95.7% of pre-disruption efficiency. Companies like Samsung and TSMC illustrate this strategy by flexibly modifying buffers to alleviate risks while maintaining market competitiveness. Forecasts suggest that by 2030, 92% of firms will use these robust designs, sustaining buffers at 2.3 times their prior levels. Ultimately, reconciling lean and resilient solutions converts inventory into a strategic insurance mechanism for navigating perpetual volatility, generating a $14.20 return for each $1 invested.