Regular sales are not “simple” in an absolute sense, but they are at least logical. You can build a baseline and defend it with facts. You look at history, seasonality, number of stores, store clusters, locations, shelf share, distribution, assortment changes. You can explain why demand is going up or down, and you can translate that into a plan that operations can actually execute.

Promo demand is a different animal, because it is never just your decision. It is your price, your mechanic, your depth, your display, your availability, your timing, your competitor’s reaction, and the customer’s mood all at once. One small change in depth can create a completely different behavior. One competitor can drop price a little more aggressively and your uplift disappears in real time. If the same product gets discounted by several retailers at the same time, it becomes even more confusing, because what looks like “incremental demand” is often just demand moving between channels, or between weeks, or between your promo and your own regular sales. And if you do not explicitly model cannibalization and halo, you end up celebrating volume while quietly paying for it with margin and with chaos in replenishment.

We all talk digital tools, but promos are still the biggest question mark. No universal button. Many retailers build their own add ons and libraries.

I started looking at what the big networks do, because I wanted to understand what “good” looks like at scale, when you cannot rely on heroic planners and manual spreadsheets.

Walmart is a good example of operational muscle and speed. They plan and execute with a strong supplier interface and a focus on network readiness, which means inventory positioning and fast reaction are part of the game, not an afterthought. Their approach is not about constant deep discounting, it is more about being selective and being able to move fast when they choose to promote.

Tesco is a very different story, and that is exactly why it is interesting. Their loyalty layer turns promotions into measurable customer behavior, not just price cuts. When you have that, you can learn much faster what works, what cannibalizes, what creates true incremental value, and what is just noise.

Carrefour is a reference when it comes to balancing big national campaigns with local realities across formats and countries. You cannot copy paste one plan everywhere, so the discipline is in the calendar, governance, and localization, supported by strong coordination across marketing, commercial, and supply chain.

Target is known for forecasting at scale. What I take from that is not a specific tool, but the ability to industrialize the basics: promo flags, events, price changes, and assortment signals must translate into store level demand plans and replenishment decisions fast enough to matter.

Historically, warehouse automation relied on traditional optimization methods that created static, "perfect average" policies for machinery to follow. Willem Guter, a research engineer at the MIT Intelligent Logistics Systems Lab, notes that machine learning is changing this paradigm by enabling minute-by-minute, real-time optimization

For example, Autonomous Mobile Robots (AMRs) can now independently decide when to charge, where to park, and how to navigate efficiently to avoid traffic. While training an AI model requires massive compute power, the trained model executes decisions incredibly fast, allowing warehouses to continuously adapt to real-time information. However, Guter warns that deploying these models in the real world still requires rigorous verification to prevent AI "hallucinations"- instances where the system makes a confidently wrong decision.

In global trade and procurement, the sheer volume of data often paralyzes traditional systems. Dr. Elenna Dugundji, who leads the MIT Deep Knowledge for Supply Chain and Logistics Lab, highlights how deep learning is replacing fragile, rule-based categorization systems. When dealing with tens of thousands of suppliers and new SKUs, deterministic "if-then" rules break quickly. Conversely, stochastic machine learning models continuously learn and adapt, automatically categorizing spend and freeing up category managers for strategic negotiations.

Furthermore, the integration of Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) with complex databases is revolutionizing supply chain visibility. Instead of clicking through endless dashboards, planners can query their own private data securely. Excitingly, connecting RAG to "graph databases" allows companies to map out cascading risks. If a supplier goes offline due to a geopolitical event, a graph database can instantly show exactly which raw materials, finished goods, and total spend are impacted.

On a global scale, machine learning is also being used to predict ocean freight bottlenecks. By applying clustering algorithms to ship signals, researchers can identify port congestion in real-time and forecast how delays in one port will cascade to others along the route.

Despite these technological leaps, the human element remains paramount. Dr. Bryan Reimer, co-director of MIT’s Advanced Vehicle Technology Consortium, stresses that AI’s greatest value lies in amplifying human expertise rather than fully automating it. AI is excellent at providing decision support at scale, but it lacks the contextual ground truth that experienced planners possess.

Reimer warns of "automation complacency," a growing organizational risk where employees rely too heavily on AI to generate acceptable but mediocre outputs - a phenomenon he calls "work slop". To counter this, organizations must establish high standards, using AI strictly as a co-pilot to accelerate creativity and hone insights, rather than as an autopilot that blindly executes tasks.

Looking ahead, the era of massive, general-purpose large language models (LLMs) may be giving way to something more targeted. The future of supply chain AI lies in smaller, domain-specific models trained on niche industry data. A model designed to manage the flow of energy should look fundamentally different from one optimizing the distribution of perishable fruit. By focusing on smaller, strategically trained models, supply chains can reduce compute costs, increase data security, and drive tangible operational efficiencies.

While much of the global focus has been on disruptions caused by climate change, market volatility, and resource scarcity, conflict-driven shocks are once again taking centre stage.

At the time of writing in June 2025, the escalating Israel–Iran conflict serves as a reminder that geopolitical instability can further strain and fracture already fragile global systems overnight. In this context, resilient food supply chains are no longer just a business priority – they are a global imperative. Businesses worldwide are rethinking how they source, produce, and distribute food, recognising that long-term stability depends on adaptive, trusted relationships with farmers.

This article explores the frontlines of resilient food system design – from partnerships to scalable innovations that balance sustainability and security. A resilient food system means not just securing food supplies but ensuring that smallholder farmers and agricultural workers worldwide are empowered with fair prices, access to funding opportunities, and are given a voice in shaping sustainable solutions.

Despite modest gains in agricultural output, climate, conflict, and compliance hurdles are preventing that food from flowing freely and equitably; thus, global food markets remain fragile. FAO forecast for 2024–2025 showed slight increases in the production of cereals, vegetable oils, sugar, dairy, and meat, supported by relatively favourable weather in some areas and expanded cultivation. However, supply recovery remains uneven, and price volatility persists due to persistent disruptions. Cereal production was expected to rise modestly, though global stocks stay tight, pressured by strong demand and reduced yields in parts of Africa and Asia. Rice production has been recovering after El Niño-related shortfalls in South and Southeast Asia, but prices remain high. According to FAO, vegetable oil prices rose 33.5% year-on-year in early 2024, driven by weather-related crop losses in Southeast Asia and Eastern Europe, biodiesel demand, and Ukraine war-related supply disruptions. Sugar prices jumped to 26.7% in 2023 due to poor harvests in India and Thailand, but fell 13.2% in 2024 as output recovered, especially in Brazil. Dairy and meat prices also climbed by 17% in the case of meat, driven by high feed costs, limited exports, and ongoing conflict-related constraints.

Meanwhile, coffee markets are under pressure from climate impacts and compliance with new regulatory requirements such as the EU Deforestation Regulation, which may reduce market access for some producers and lead to intermittent shortages. Also, conflict and insecurity in key trade regions have further exacerbated the risk of scarcity: in April 2024, a hijacked rice freighter in Haiti lost much of its cargo, and a wheat shipment from Ukraine to East Africa was spoiled after a three-month delay due to regional conflict.

Together, these converging pressures – climatic, geopolitical, logistical, and regulatory – highlight the fragility and interdependence of global food systems. They set the attention on how even modest production gains may not translate into stable availability or affordability for consumers, and in some cases, may result in actual product shortages on store shelves.

Building resilience has become a strategic imperative, and businesses are increasingly shifting to adaptive systems capable of absorbing shocks and ensuring continuity. This transformation involves embedding resilience into sourcing, operations, and partnerships across the chain (Figure 1, overleaf).

Figure 1. Interventions driving supply chain adaptability and resilience

Table 1. Summary of key strategies for building resilient food systems, highlighting interventions at production, supply chain, and policy levels

Table 2. Major challenges constraining the implementation of resilience strategies across global food systems

Diversification, particularly of sourcing locations and supplier networks, is the core principle. Relying on a single region/producer can make businesses vulnerable to multiple crises. Therefore, according to BCG’s 2025 report on agrifood resilience, companies are now actively reshaping their procurement strategies to include regional or local suppliers along with global partners, reducing vulnerability and enhancing resilience.

Strategies that can be put in place include:

• Diversifying crop sources by exploring underutilized or climate-resilient options – such as buckwheat, flax, or watermelon seeds – for snack production, especially those suited to varying soil and climate conditions in alternative growing regions (e.g., Eastern Europe, Central Asia, or parts of sub- Saharan Africa).

• Regenerative agriculture, by supporting farming practices that restore soil health, retain water, and enhance biodiversity, is thought to actively mitigate upstream production risks.

• Digitalisation coupled with regenerative agriculture, which allows for precision agriculture. Such practices aim to improve productivity and build predictability and responsiveness into the supply chain. According to a former BCG report, digital integration is now seen as a catalyst for resilience, enabling companies to react faster to supply-demand fluctuations and environmental risks.

• Long-term procurement contracts are another foundational element that provides farmers with guaranteed purchase volumes and stable pricing aligned with sustainability targets. This way, businesses reduce the financial uncertainty while increasing sustainability-linked investments.

• Beyond field-level interventions, several agribusinesses and local cooperatives are jointly investing in shared cold storage facilities and improved transport networks. This co-investment helps reduce post-harvest losses of perishable crops like fruits and vegetables, while also easing logistical bottlenecks caused by unpredictable events. Such collaborative infrastructure development is especially impactful in the region, where gaps in storage and transport capacity often exacerbate the effects of climate shocks and volatile market conditions, ensuring more stable supply chains and better income for farmers.

• Financial support, such as crop insurance, climate-indexed finance, and blended capital tools, helps smallholders against extreme weather and price volatility. For instance, climate-indexed insurance, which pays out based on weather data rather than individual losses, helps smallholder farmers to protect their incomes against droughts and floods. Additionally, blended capital funds are combining public and private resources to provide affordable loans and grants for climate-resilient farming practices.

Complementing more ‘conventional’ approaches, cutting-edge technologies are beginning to reshape how resilience is built across food systems. Precision Agriculture and Smart Farming (e.g., IoT sensors and AI-driven analytics) are revolutionizing farming practices, enabling real-time monitoring of crop health, soil conditions, and resource usage, leading to optimized yields and reduced environmental impact. The State of Food and Agriculture: Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security discusses how Smart irrigation systems adjust watering schedules based on soil moisture levels, conserving water and enhancing crop resilience. watering schedules based on soil moisture levels, conserving water and enhancing crop resilience.

Beyond precision farming, AI and big data analytics are being used for predictive modelling of climate risks, outbreaks, and market fluctuations, allowing proactive responses. Blockchain technology enhances supply chain transparency by providing records of product journeys from farm to table, ensuring traceability, authenticity, reducing fraud, and increasing consumer acceptance (e.g., showcase of ethical sourcing practices). Climate-adaptive agriculture, alternative proteins, and cultured foods are gaining momentum as consumers seek sustainable and ethical food options. The development of heat/drought-tolerant varieties and pest-resistant strains is expected to increase food security amid the weather extremes and climate change, while the production of lab-grown meats and animal-free proteins aims to reduce the environmental footprint of traditional livestock farming. In addition to challenges related to scalability, cost, and regulatory burdens, GFI reports that upcoming market growth and increasing consumer acceptance will create further opportunities for innovation, production, and trade at lower costs.

Some steps are already underway across the food industry with leading companies having moved beyond traditional sourcing to invest in regenerative practices, long-term contracts, and digital tools, generating measurable environmental and economic benefits. These efforts provide clear evidence that building resilience is more than just a theoretical concept.

Collaboration across the chain

The newly elected European Commission has placed agriculture and food systems high on its agenda, outlining its priorities in a revised strategic vision for the sector. A key element of this vision is simplifying regulation and attracting younger generations into farming. In line with this policy shift, food businesses are increasingly moving beyond transactional models to form deeper partnerships with farmers, anchored in knowledge sharing, shared risk, and long-term commitments. These collaborative approaches are not only improving sustainability outcomes but also enhancing the resilience of supply chains facing climate, market, and geopolitical shocks.

Regenerative agriculture in action

A clear sign of this shift is the surge in corporate investment in regenerative agriculture, with multinational companies investing heavily in training farmers in regenerative and climate-smart practices. Through the Nescafé Plan 2030, more than 1,400 field staff and agronomists trained over 200,000 farmers across 16 countries in regenerative practices such as:

• optimized fertilization,

• mulching,

• soil cover,

• composting.

Nescafé, Nestlé’s largest coffee brand, has already exceeded its 2025 goal: as of 2024, 32% of its coffee is sourced from farms using regenerative practices, surpassing the original 20% target. This also has other measurable results, such as 20–40% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions per kilogram of green coffee, distribution of 21m plantlets to rejuvenate aging coffee farms, strategic B2B collaborations that integrate business training with agronomic support, helping farmers improve profitability and resilience. Nestlé is not alone in this approach. Danone’s ‘Farming for Generations’ initiative partners with over 50,000 farmers across 20 countries, co-developing regenerative practices that enhance soil health, animal welfare, and emissions reduction. These partnerships not only strengthen the company’s dairy and plant-based supply chains but also help Danone meet its broader climate and sustainability commitments. Olam Food Ingredients funds solar dryers and community storage hubs in West Africa to support cocoa and coffee farmers.

Long-term procurement contracts

Long-term procurement contracts are providing farmers with the income security guaranteeing purchase volumes and stable prices, much needed to invest in sustainable practices. Mars, Mondelez, and Nestlé, under the Cocoa & Forests Initiative, offer multi-year contracts tied to sustainability and deforestation targets, ensuring price stability for farmers and reinforcing sustainable practices. While multi-year, sustainability-linked contracts under CFI have driven measurable improvements in traceability (e.g., over 80% of direct cocoa supply now traceable to the farm level in some countries), agroforestry (mapping of over 184,000 farms in Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire, and distribution of millions of tree seedlings), and carbon mitigation, providing farmers with economic security. Yet achieving systemic, landscape-wide deforestation reduction remains a work in progress.

Digital tools

Alongside physical investments, digital agriculture is becoming a critical enabler of farmer–business collaboration. Technology platforms allow both sides to monitor climate, soil conditions, and crop health in real time, enhancing precision, reducing input costs, and increasing productivity. AB InBev uses its SmartBarley platform to share AI-driven agronomic insights with barley growers, helping optimize water usage, fertilizer applications, and yield predictions – enhancing productivity and resource efficiency.

These platforms enable precision agriculture, reduce input costs, and improve yield reliability, critical for resilience. AI tools are leveraged to accelerate both the production and regulatory approval of cultured (lab-grown) foods in several impactful ways, spanning product development, regulatory approval, and manufacturing scale-up. A few startups are already incorporating AI to automate bioprocesses and refine product formulation.

Farmers and experts stress that resilience depends on strong, trusted partnerships, access to finance, and practical support for adopting sustainable practices. Giovanni Muñoz of the FAO Investment Centre noted, ‘In regions where farmers are advancing agriculture through robust organizations, they can access financing at favourable rates, benefiting from economies of scale.’ Similarly, Marike de Peña, co-founder of the Banelino cooperative in the Dominican Republic, warned that ‘many small farmers probably will pull out if they don’t get some extra value in production’, about the added cost of compliance with new sustainability regulations.

Company leaders also highlight the importance of long-term contracts and digital tools. According to Dave McKay, President and CEO of Royal Bank of Canada, ‘Farmers have embraced climate-smart agricultural practices. Now it’s time for business leaders and policy-makers to fully support them’ through coordinated initiatives and financial incentives.

In agreement, US Farm Credit leaders found that ‘farmers who used to cover crops for five years or more saved over $50 per acre compared to those just starting,’ emphasising how finance can support long-term resilience.

Although these voices collectively underscore that collaboration and engagement across the chain are essential for building truly resilient food systems, persistent challenges remain and complicate progress.

Despite efforts, food businesses and farmers face significant hurdles in the implementation of resilience strategies. Financing gaps remain a primary challenge, particularly for smallholder farmers with limited financial liquidity, limited access to funding options, and risk aversion from lenders due to perceived instability in agriculture. Limited access and knowledge gaps in advanced technologies and digital tools further restrict small-scale producers from fully adopting precision agriculture or climate adaptation practices.

Policy inconsistencies and regulatory fragmentation across regions also create uncertainty, undermining long-term planning and investments in sustainable supply chains. For instance, while the European Union pushes ambitious Green Deal targets and the Farm to Fork strategy, some Member States have slower or conflicting national policies on pesticide use or fertilizer regulations, creating confusion for companies operating across borders. Also, the ban on deforestation-linked imports has not been adopted globally, and this complicates the compliance for global agribusinesses.

Of note, the regulation has also faced pushback from major industry players like Mondelēz, who argue that the supply chain is not yet ready for full compliance and have called for delays in its implementation. Likewise, free trade agreements may prioritize export volumes without integrating sustainability criteria, clashing with domestic environmental regulations and complicating supply chain alignment. Other socio-economic barriers, such as land tenure insecurity, gender inequality, and limited education, continue to constrain resilience-building efforts at the grassroots level.

Building resilience in global food systems is no longer optional: it is essential. The promising steps taken by leading food companies and their farmer partners provide a roadmap for scaling regenerative practices, digital innovation, and equitable partnerships. To safeguard food security amid climate change, geopolitical tensions, and market shocks, the entire value chain must collaborate, invest, and innovate. This requires navigating complex regulatory landscapes – harmonising compliance with evolving policies across regions, which is essential to support scalable and sustainable solutions.

As the food industry continues to adapt, aligning business strategies with clear regulatory frameworks will be essential for a resilient global food chain that can withstand future climate, market, and geopolitical shocks, while ensuring food security for the generations to come.

I have built S&OP and IBP six times. Here is what almost nobody tells you about starting the process.

Most companies think they need a perfect template or a big digital tool before beginning. It never works like that. The real work is much simpler and much more human.

My first S&OP implementation was in 2009 at Danone. It was a very basic process, but over time it grew into a full IBP with finance scenarios and impact on P&L.

Then Carlsberg - two times for different markets. First for Belarus, then S&OP and S&OE for Russia and Eastern Europe. After that a global dairy and snacking company with CPFR as part of the model. Then a mega project in the MENA region. And now S&OP in my current role in retail.

After all these cycles I can confirm that the hardest part is not the process itself. The hardest part is starting it in a way that people accept, follow, and trust.

Here are my five recommendations for anyone who is at the beginning of the journey.

The CEO is the person who must approve final S&OP decisions. If the CEO is in the room, everyone else shows up. Without this sponsorship the process becomes a routine meeting with no power.

Sales, finance, marketing, supply chain, NPD. If they do not trust the process, it will not work. Once I had to meet a sales director four times for coffee until she finally agreed to try. After the first cycle she became one of the biggest supporters.

Do not jump into a 12 to 24 month horizon on day one. Start with six months and focus the conversation on the first three. Keep the meeting tight. No business review. No brainstorming. All of that happens before. S&OP is only for decisions.

This part is critical. People already live in a back to back reality. A well structured S&OP reduces chaos. It creates a clear cadence and eliminates dozens of ad-hoc conversations.

Send a calendar for the next 12 months. Confirm who must join. Follow the agenda. Send minutes and decisions every time. Everyone should work with the same information and the same numbers.

Nothing here is complicated. You just need to start and continue. At some point you will feel that not everything is working. That is normal. just keep going.

And one day you will hear your colleagues say that S&OP is the backbone of the business.

To achieve that accessibility, production is intentionally fragmented across geographies, with fibers grown in one region, spun into yarn in another, woven into fabric somewhere else, dyed and finished in a specialized hub, and finally assembled where labor and capacity are most competitive, which means that by the time a simple dress reaches the shelf it may have traveled more than 15,000 kilometers before the customer even touches it.

This global dispersion is a cost strategy, because each stage is located where it can be executed most efficiently, whether through lower labor cost, established infrastructure, trade advantages, or energy pricing. But while this structure reduces unit cost at scale, it simultaneously increases operational complexity, extending lead times and exposing the business to currency movements, tariffs, logistics disruptions, regulatory shifts, and quality variability across multiple jurisdictions.

What appears to be a straightforward ~$40 dress is therefore the output of a carefully orchestrated global network that must align sourcing, production planning, freight, customs compliance, and working capital management under tight margin pressure.

The paradox is that the lower the visible price on the rack, the more sophisticated and globally interconnected the supply chain behind it is likely to be, because saving cents at scale requires precision coordination across borders.

Let’s start a small Friday tradition: a “book for the weekend” that is actually worth your time.

This week: “Eve: How the Female Body Drove 200 Million Years of Human Evolution” by Cat Bohannon .

What stayed with me is how strongly the book challenges the idea that the male body is the baseline. It isn’t - the female body has been shaping evolution from the very beginning, and far more than we tend to acknowledge.

At the same time, it made me reflect on something less comfortable: at some point, women adapted into a position that allowed us to move into the background. Not because of biology, but because of how systems, roles, and expectations evolved around us.

The book explains very clearly why men and women respond differently: physically, cognitively, emotionally. Not in terms of better or worse, but in terms of different design. Which means expecting identical behaviors in leadership, decision-making, or stress situations is simply not realistic.

After reading it, you start looking at women with even more respect: for what we create, how we influence, and how much of the system quietly depends on that.

I would recommend it to everyone. For women, it gives language and perspective. For men, it gives understanding of who is actually next to them, and why they think, react, and lead the way they do.