Private business is increasingly presented as a leading agent of development in policy, also in the pursuit of developmental goals beyond business, such as food security (SDG2 in particular). It is argued that the private sector is more effective and efficient in raising investment capital and targeting goals than entities of the public sector and civil society. This has spawned inclusive business models — ways of doing business that benefit the poor as producers or consumers. Inclusive agribusiness improves the livelihoods of poor farmers by integrating them in commercial value chains and thus gaining access to markets, inputs, and services like finance and training, in ways that are commercially viable. This contribution seeks to position this inclusive agribusiness approach in its political-economy context and assess its merits in pursuing food security through impact pathways such as availability and access (income). While there is literature on inclusive business and food security, its scope tends to be limited to participating smallholders while overlooking other community members. The main argument the present paper makes is that while there is evidence for positive income effects among participating farmers, there are few indications that this actually translates into improved food and nutrition security for the many. Shortcomings are briefly reviewed.

私营企业越来越多地被视为政策发展的主要推动者，也在追求诸如食品安全（尤其是SDG2）之类的非企业发展目标方面。有人认为，私营部门在筹集投资资金和目标方面比公共部门和民间社会的实体更为有效。这催生了包容性商业模式，即使生产者或消费者受益的穷人的经商方式。包容性农业综合企业通过将贫困农民纳入商业价值链来改善他们的生活，从而以商业上可行的方式获得市场，投入以及诸如金融和培训等服务。这项贡献旨在将这种包容性的农业综合企业方法置于其政治经济背景下，并评估其通过诸如可获得性和获取性（收入）之类的影响途径实现粮食安全的优点。尽管有关于包容性商业和粮食安全的文献，但其范围往往限于参与的小农，而忽略了其他社区成员。本文提出的主要论据是，尽管有证据表明参与的农民之间有积极的收入影响，但几乎没有迹象表明，这实际上可以改善许多人的粮食和营养安全。缺点被简要回顾。其范围往往限于参与的小农，而忽视了其他社区成员。本文提出的主要论据是，尽管有证据表明参与的农民之间有积极的收入影响，但几乎没有迹象表明，这实际上可以改善许多人的粮食和营养安全。缺点被简要回顾。其范围往往限于参与的小农，而忽视了其他社区成员。本文提出的主要论据是，尽管有证据表明参与的农民之间有积极的收入影响，但几乎没有迹象表明，这实际上可以改善许多人的粮食和营养安全。缺点被简要回顾。