Exploring Community-Supported Agriculture through Maslow’s Hierarchy: A Systematic Review of Research Themes and Trends

Abstract

Community-supported agriculture (CSA) has emerged as a pivotal model for sustainable and humanistic agricultural practices, emphasizing the symbiotic relationship between food production, consumption, and sustainable ecosystems. Despite the growing interest, a comprehensive analysis of research themes and trends within the CSA framework remains sparse. This paper undertakes a systematic review of CSA literature from 1999 to 2023, identifying evolving research hotspots, dominant themes, and prospective directions by keyword analysis to corroborate Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory. The research analysis location is categorized into four temporal phases, revealing a geographical expansion from North America to encompass Asia, Africa, and other continents. This expansion corroborates Maslow’s theory, illustrating a global shift from fulfilling basic physiological needs towards recognizing sustainable practices, particularly in developing regions. The results of temporal trends (5 phases) and the hotspots of keyword analysis support each other by showing a societal shift from basic sustenance to a deeper understanding of nutrition and diet. Most of the recent research keywords are grouped into the “environment” and “health and education” categories, indicating an increasing emphasis on transforming the food system and nutrition education. This review suggests conducting an integrated analysis that links the various stages of the food supply chain with the criteria outlined in the Sustainable Agriculture Matrix (SAM). It highlights that the “environment” theme is a stage of building up esteem and self-realization that needs to be unfolded in the future, given that most research on community-supported agriculture (CSA) focuses on the “economy and society” aspect and consumption stage, which burnish self-morality in the theory of Maslow. Overall, this review proposes an analysis of the relevance among different subject categories and between food supply chain stages, which reveals that the trend of research under CSA development is accorded to the theory of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and calls for a more holistic approach to agricultural research that considers ecological, health, and social imperatives.

1. Introduction

The imperative for a sustainable, equitable, and resilient food system is increasingly recognized as a global environmental and social health cornerstone. While adept at producing high yields, the current industrial agriculture model has been scrutinized for its environmental issues, such as greenhouse gas emissions, soil erosion, and chemical runoff [1,2]. In addition, some European countries also produce high levels of greenhouse gas emissions during crop cultivation. There are also high levels of pesticide residues and active ingredients from veterinary drugs in agrifood products, which contribute to the environmental footprint of agrifood product trades in the European Union market [3]. These practices undermine the long-term fertility of the land and contribute to climate change, one of the most pressing threats to food security [4]. Furthermore, the investment trends in the agricultural sector indicate a shift towards sustainable practices and a reduction in poverty and inequality at both sectoral and regional levels [5,6].

Moreover, the industrial model has fostered a disconnect between consumers and the origins of their food, leading to a lack of transparency and accountability in the food system [7,8]. This disconnect has been linked to a series of social issues, including the marginalization of small-scale farmers, the erosion of rural communities, and the perpetuation of food injustice [9,10]. The dominance of large-scale agribusiness has also raised concerns about the concentration of power in the food system, leading to calls for more democratic and participatory approaches to food production and distribution [11]. Study shows that the primary strategies for international corporate social development in agribusiness include valuing and motivating labor personnel, minimizing waste in products, maintaining consumer relationships, and conserving the environment [5]. The pressure from the global food market needs to be addressed in an alternative way. It seeks a pattern that avoids extensive urbanization, globalization, and consumerism. Meanwhile, it raises awareness of food localization, shortens the food supply chain, and involves citizens from farmers to policymakers in the entire food system [11].

In response, alternative food systems like community-supported agriculture (CSA) have gained traction as models that can address these challenges. CSAs are predicated on the principles of organic farming [12], community engagement, and a direct connection between consumers and producers [13], which propose that planting quality food products, feed, and raw materials for food to ensure the balance between the system of agricultural production and natural processes preserves depleted resources and leaves the most important means of production to the next generations [14]. They offer a counter-narrative to industrial agriculture, emphasizing localism, sustainability, and social justice [15]. The CSA model has been particularly effective in fostering community resilience, as evidenced by its ability to provide stable, healthy food options during crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic [16], which shows public awareness is converted from the physiological stage to the love and belonging stage of the theory of Maslow.

Community-supported agriculture (CSA) is understood as an innovative production practice that fills the gap and discrepancy between different stakeholders: producers, consumers, policymakers, and others who are involved in the food system. Also, it is regarded as a network that connects these different stakeholders as individuals. The rise of CSA and its potential to contribute to a more sustainable food system [17] can be understood through the lens of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory. The trends of the food system are in line with Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, which indicates that human beings are motivated by different levels of needs sequentially [18]. The theory of Maslow proposed that human beings experience five stages sequentially from lower to higher needs: physiological, safety, social, esteem, and self-realization [19] (Figure 1). This theory suggests that as basic physiological needs for food and safety are met, individuals and societies begin to seek fulfillment of higher-level needs, including social belonging, esteem, and self-actualization [18,19]. The CSA model aligns with this progression, offering not only a means to secure food but also a platform for community involvement, social connections, and self-achievement in environmental conservation [20]. We would develop a discussion for correspondence between CSA and the theory of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs after we demonstrate the analysis result of the review.

This paper aims to conduct a comprehensive review of the literature on CSA, synthesizing insights from a wide range of studies to analyze the patterns, predominant themes, and future research directions in this area. The origin and evolution of community-supported agriculture (CSA) is not a coincidence and can be interpreted according to the theory of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. It is the product of human development, which is imprinted in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Sustainable Agriculture Matrix (SAM).

From the origin of CSA until now, there is a growing body of literature discussing the economic [21] and social [9] effects of CSA based on qualitative research or quantitative research. We will explore the potential of CSA’s contribution to the food system by providing a more holistic approach to food production that considers nutritional, environmental, and social dimensions. This review will also consider the role of CSA in fostering agrobiodiversity, promoting regenerative farming practices, and supporting the livelihoods of small-scale farmers [21,22].

By delving into the literature, we aim to highlight the multifaceted benefits of CSA and its potential to contribute to a more sustainable, equitable, and resilient food system. This expanded introduction sets the stage for a nuanced discussion on the role of CSA in addressing the complex challenges facing contemporary agriculture.

2. Methodology

This review is based on systematic analysis methodology. The Preferred Reporting Item for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was followed. It is an evidence-based set of procedures, including a flow diagram and a checklist for standardized reporting in systematic reviews, which covers various aspects of a systematic review such as the title, abstract, methods, results, discussion, and future direction. The reason for choosing this systematic analysis as the reference guideline is because the research was based on a transparent and objective process of setting a research protocol to select target articles [23]. The purpose of this literature review is to understand the revealed hotspots, dominant themes, and future research directions of CSA research through keyword analysis and article classification.

2.1. Search Strategy

The format for this review analysis is used to search one database, Web of Science Core Collection (accessed on 29 December 2023). Web of Science Core Collection is one of the biggest authorized bibliographic databases in the world, which contains high-quality peer-reviewed publications [24]. The Web of Science Core Collection database is superior to, and more authentic than, the Clarivate Web of Science database. It contains over 250 disciplines in sciences, social sciences, and arts and humanities. This breadth is advantageous for conducting thorough research on CSA subjects across different domains. Additionally, each article in the database is selectively indexed [25]. There is no other database for this review because the goal of the review is to do a more accurate and more persuasive analysis. The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews are followed for this systematic review [23]. Figure 2 shows the procedural steps indicating the selection of the reviewed articles.

As the goal of this review is based on the analysis of keywords about CSA in all fields, the research terms were “community supported agriculture” OR “community supported agriculture CSA” OR “community-supported agriculture” OR “community-supported agriculture CSA”. We make sure the selected articles contain the defined keywords in the title, abstract, or keywords section. Initially, 269 journal reports of interest were selected, and to clarify, the time of retrieval was December 2023, in case the number of reports in the database has been updated.

2.1.1. Article Selection Criteria

The criteria for reviewed articles included the following: (i) were written in English, (ii) were the correct abstract and literature types, (iii) screened for correct keywords, and (iv) were related to the community-supported agriculture topic. We removed 6 articles in the first-round screening because none were written in English. The type of correction and meeting abstract article were excluded. Since further analysis is based on the keywords, 25 articles were screened off. The purpose of this review is to unveil the hotspots, dominant themes, and future research directions of CSA research based on the keywords, which requires that the articles must have the keywords. Also, the screened articles needed to be related to CSA topics in different dimensions (economic, environmental, social, and education and health). We determined that 42 articles were not relevant to the CSA topic after reading the content.

For example, in the article, “How to avoid the tragedy of alternative food networks (AFNs)? The impact of social capital and transparency on AFN performance”, was excluded. Due to its context not being about community-supported agriculture, the article could not be adopted, although community-supported agriculture was shown as a mode of alternative food network discussed in the article. Since a limited number of articles are applied the quantitative methods, this review has not adopted criteria regarding underlying statistics (e.g., regarding significance or sample size).

2.1.2. Final Included Articles

A total of 187 articles are included for later research trends, research hot-spots, and keyword analysis, which span 1999–2023. In addition to the systematic literature review about an integrated analysis that connects different subject categories and food supply chain stages, revealing research trends, this paper also employed keyword analysis and article classification. The final included articles, along with their essential keywords (provided by the authors), were processed to provide a visualization of the interconnection for this research. The visualization will clearly show the CSA spatial trends and future directions, either for the Sustainable Agriculture Matrix (SAM), the food supply chain stages, or a combination of both.

2.2. Location Trend of Study and Publication Statistical Analysis

Regarding the publications, the number of publications was simply accounted for by year (see Figure 3). This study includes the location of a study trend analysis. Due to the publication location not representing the study location for articles, the study locations of the articles were collected for analysis. Study locations include multiple ways, cities, regions, and countries. The locations were classified by continents shown in Figure 4A–D, and by different periods. To see the temporal and spatial variation of CSA, the periods were separated into four periods, 1999–2005, 2006–2012, 2013–2018, and 2019–2023. Some articles contain more than one location.

2.3. Author Keywords and Title-Based Keywords Processing

Author keywords can express the content of articles more efficiently [26], which is the analysis form in this study. Regarding the selected articles, the author keywords were all extracted and listed by year. As the author’s keywords may not reflect the title information, each term of each title was listed. All the pronouns, article words (a, an), conjunction words (to, with), and other words that do not have actual meaning were not included [27]. Title-based keywords were listed with author keywords together by year.

First, as the number of articles is not large enough, especially the articles published before 2014 (not including 2014), the raw keywords with frequencies higher than a minimum threshold are focused upon (e.g., ≥2). The minimum threshold for raw keyword frequencies after 2014 is set at (e.g., ≥3).

Second, because keyword analysis is the target, some keywords were kept to avoid being too specific or too general. For example, the words “urban agriculture [28]” and “peri-urban landscape planning [29]” were selected in the same group, but the words “civic agriculture [30]” were selected in another group. These two principles were the most appropriate methods for this study, but there are few approaches applied in detail (

Table 1. Approaches for raw keywords processing.

Approaches
Description	Examples
Same word root but in different forms	“alternative food network [4]” vs. “alternative food networks [31]” (network)
Excess ending word	“solidarity [32]” vs. “solidarity economy [16]”
Similar terms that may be merged	“organic farming [33]” and “organic farms [34]” are merged
Terms that have the same meaning	“low-income households [35]” vs. “poverty [36]”
Subset terms that may be merged	“short supply chain [37]” and “short food supply chain [30]” are merged

) [27]. The raw keywords in the latest research (2019–2023) could be challenging to count without a specific approach, as many share a common word root or meaning. The examples we listed are representatives of these approaches, which appeared when we processed raw keywords. Finally, after processing all keywords, those with frequencies higher than a minimum threshold (e.g., ≥3) were focused upon for retaining valuable information more efficiently.

2.4. Classification Based on Sustainable Agriculture Matrix and Food Supply Chain

Since CSA is a mode of agriculture and an alternative food network [9], we classified articles along two sets of indicators, the food supply chain stages and research dimensions, which both refer to the Sustainable Agriculture Matrix (SAM) [38] to determine the research topic trend under the CSA subject. It is a method of quantifying national agricultural sustainability, which involves 18 indicators and 3 main dimensions: environmental, economic, and social aspects.

There are two reasons for referring to the SAM in this study. First of all, there is synergy between the Sustainable Agriculture Matrix (SAM) and CSA at some point. At the end of the 20th century, more than one billion people living in the developing world still were in poverty according to the World Development Report in 1990, which underlined the unbalanced development in the world. Against this background, the Sustainable Agriculture Matrix (SAM) was introduced by M.S. Swaminathan to ease the challenges we faced, that people who lived in poverty still could not access enough food, and the SAM represented an equal rights approach to welfare and technology in agriculture [39]. The mission of the SAM and the characteristics of CSA are both dedicated to satisfying human hunger and human rights through ecology resilience. The initial dimensions of the SAM framework were ecology, economics, and equity, but it has transformed into environment, economics, and society, which we are referred to in this study. Secondly, SAM and CSA both aim to achieve harmony among the dimensions of environment, economics, and society by fulfilling different hierarchies, which is interconnected with Maslow’s theory.

To adapt this study and the situation, the “health and education” aspect was added to the dimensions based on the SAM, since there are some articles that discuss the health benefits of CSA, such as those related to dietary intake [40]. Also, the “health and education” aspect should be considered in holistic analysis. We combined the economic and societal dimensions into one, as many articles discussed the economic benefits and societal impact of CSA together. The dimensions of the SAM we applied in this study were “environment”, “health and education”, and “society and economy”.

Additionally, the food supply chain stage applied is based on a framework announced by the USDA to strengthen the food system and supply chain to be more resilient [41]. In the framework, “production”, “processing”, “distribution”, and “consumer” stages have been included, although the “processing” stage is not considered an indicator and was replaced by the “whole supply chain” as an indicator in this study. The other three stages have remained as indicators. The stage of “consumer” was changed to “consumption”. The reason “processing” was not included as an indicator is that CSA emphasizes local and sustainable food [4].

The selected articles were put under these two sets of indicators to classify them to determine if the context involved any indicators. Some articles discuss more than one aspect, which can account for both indicators. These two sets of indicators are coordinate axes, and each indicator is the corresponding scale. The result of classification is presented in a coordinate system (Figure 5). The size of the dot means the number of articles under certain indicators. The color of the dot represents the weight of the article corresponding to certain indicators.

2.5. Keywords Hot-Spots and Temporal Trend Analysis

Keyword analysis can help in analyzing the research hotspots and research topic. To determine the research hot-spots and topic, we separated all processed keywords in three dimensions based on the aforementioned SAM criteria of economy and society, environment, and health and education. Furthermore, these dimensions can express CSA from sustainable and diverse angles [42]. The economy and society dimensions are painted in two different colors to discern hotspots in detail. First, the number of keywords reflects the most popular hot-spots and research topics under each dimension. Second, the hotspots can be assessed more comprehensively for the last 24 years. The results are shown in a circle plot to visualize the connection between these keywords (Figure 6).

Temporal trend analysis can reveal the process of research topic evolution. To further analyze the keywords that are trending up, a similar approach was applied for analyzing the research location trend that divided 24 years into 5 periods firstly, and which could present data variation clearly (1999–2006, 2008–2011, 2012–2015, 2016–2019, 2020–2023). Because there was a shortage of publications before 2014, the screened keywords based on frequencies higher than a minimum threshold are focused on n ≥ 2, before the period 2012–2015. After 2015, the screened keywords were based on frequencies higher than a minimum threshold of n ≥ 3. After processing keywords by the aforementioned approaches, the final keyword frequencies were higher than a minimum threshold of n ≥ 3. The heat map exhibits the keywords’ temporal trend by frequency and period. The color of each word varies by time, which means the research topics and hotspots change over time. It provides a comparison of topics during different periods.

2.6. Data Analysis

Based on the statistics of the number of locations in studies, we identified study locations by world map. To illustrate the classification of articles across the Sustainable Agriculture Matrix and stages, we created a bubble chart. Additionally, we used a circular diagram to explore the distribution of keywords across different dimensions. Chats mentioned above are produced by Bioinformatics (accessed on 20 January 2024, http://www.bioinformatics.com.cn). Beyond that, the keyword’s temporal trend is presented with a heat map, which was processed by GraphPad Prism 9. The data applied in this study was processed by the Microsoft Office software 2021.

3. Result and Discussion

3.1. Literature Overview

The scholarly engagement with CSA has witnessed two notable escalations with a pivotal inflection point in 2013 and 2020 that marked the onset of an increasingly discernible upward trend, particularly post-2015 (Figure 3). The escalation after 2013 could be traced back to the 2013 International Network of Community-Supported Agriculture biannual Symposium that was held in California. This symposium represented the basis of the US nationwide CSA coalition that has since been established [43], which is similar to the location trend of studies during 2013–2018 (Figure 4C).

Another notable upward trend occurred after 2020 (the start of the pandemic), highlighting the vulnerability of human beings [44]. Research sprang up about how CSA is a social practice [15] and a community network of food during the period of the pandemic [16], which shows how self-awareness is converted from the physiological phase to the love and belonging phase of the theory of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Also, the popularity of CSA during the pandemic displays the stability of providing food and its emotional value [15].

Our systematic review meticulously screened a comprehensive body of literature, culminating in the selection of 187 peer-reviewed articles for in-depth analysis. To elucidate the geographic evolution of CSA research from 1999 to 2023, we chronologically segmented the articles into four distinct periods, as illustrated in Figure 4A–D. This temporal stratification reveals a compelling expansion from initial concentrations in North America to a truly global canvas, spanning five continents: America, Europe, Oceania, Asia, and Africa.

In the nascent phase (1999–2005), research emanated predominantly from North America, with a focus on the United States of America (USA) and Canada. The subsequent period (2006–2012) witnessed the USA retaining its status as a primary research hub, while France and Australia made their inaugural contributions to the CSA literature. Concurrently, China and Iran emerged as the pioneering Asian nations engaging with CSA research, mirroring the vigorous national promotion of CSA models in China [45].

From 2013 to 2018, the USA continued to dominate the research landscape, with approximately 27% of studies concentrating on dietary intake and behavioral changes within the CSA framework. Europe paralleled the USA in research output, while Asia’s research presence was augmented by Japan and Thailand, indicating a growing regional interest in the model’s implications for sustainability. The most recent phase has ushered in a new era of inclusivity, with research emanating from all five continents, heralding the debut of African and South American perspectives. Notably, India and South Korea have enriched the Asian research narrative, offering novel insights into consumer behavior and the sustainability of smallholder farming within CSA frameworks as alternative food networks [46,47].

This geographical expansion and diversification of research foci underscore the global relevance and adaptability of CSA models. It also highlights the growing recognition of CSA as a multifaceted solution to the challenges facing modern agricultural systems, with potential applications ranging from enhancing food security to promoting environmental sustainability and social equity.

3.2. Clarify the Research Trend by Characterizing the CSA Research Impacts

3.2.1. Classifying Research Topic by Sustainable Agriculture Matrix and Food Supply Chain

To discern the trends in research topics within the domain of CSA, we employed a systematic classification of articles based on two distinct yet interrelated sets of indicators: the stages of the food supply chain and the dimensions of research within the Sustainable Agriculture Matrix (SAM). The SAM is a set of indicators innovated by the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science for assessing the performance of sustainability because the feasibility of measurement towards Sustainable Development Goals is still elusive. SAM dimensions could be the metrics to present the contributions of different nations under sustainable models in the environment, economy, and society [48]. The prototype of the SAM contains three pillars, which are environment, economics, and society [38]. In this section, after transforming the SAM, we improved article classification by combining society and economics into one dimension and treating “health and education” as a separate dimension. Due to there being many articles that explore the function and impact of CSA on education and health access [49], “health and education” is regarded as a dimension here (a classification of dimensions still called SAM in the article).

To determine the research topic trend under the CSA subject, we classified articles along two sets of indicators, the food supply chain stages and research dimensions. The classification outcomes were graphically represented in a coordinate system (Figure 5), with the SAM dimensions aligning the abscissa and the food supply chain stages plotted along the ordinate, to see if the content of the article involves any dimension of the SAM or stage of the supply chain, or both sets of indicators. This methodology enabled a visual assessment of the extent to which each article intersected with either the SAM dimensions, the supply chain stages, or an intersection of both.

Our analysis revealed three distinct categories of research focus. Initially, a subset of articles exclusively assessed the impact of the CSA model either from SAM dimensions or stages of the whole chain, regardless of whether CSA impact came from other supply chain stages or dimensions. These studies, for instance, examined the economic implications of CSA, such as its potential to enhance dietary consumption [40] or its multifaceted economic, ecological, and social benefits to farming [50], without necessarily considering the broader supply chain or SAM dimensions.

Secondly, a group of articles provided a more integrated assessment, quantifying the CSA model’s impact across both SAM dimensions and stages of the supply chain. An exemplar study in this category might explore CSA’s role in overcoming income barriers to food access and its potential to promote nutritional intake [51]. Another exemplar study stressed the finding that CSA could be a model of distribution of local food to consume varied and high-quality products, which discusses the behavior of members impacted by the way of food distribution individually [52]. Lastly, some articles considered the CSA model holistically, as a complete food system, from production through to final consumption [53]. This approach allowed for a comprehensive evaluation of CSA’s life-cycle impacts.

The majority of the articles concentrated on CSA’s role at the consumption stage and across the entire supply chain, investigating the societal and economic repercussions of consumer behavior within CSA frameworks. A smaller subset of 33 articles focused on the “health and education” dimension, which was less represented than the “society and economy” dimension and production stage. Within the SAM dimensions, articles about the “society and economy” dimension predominated, outnumbering those on the “environment” dimension by a ratio of more than four to one. This disparity suggests that the financial viability and social equity of CSA are of paramount interest to producers and farmers, as indicated by the functionality and efficiency highlighted in the literature [13].

The situation of these results is resonant with the changes of the SAM over time. The SAM has been through a long evolution that took shape to prepare for the challenges around the 1990s to solve hunger and to seek equity to access the technology and welfare of farmers. With this background, as farmers and other stakeholders involved in the food system had barriers to financial, societal, and technological resources, SAM was born with three basic pillars—ecology, economics, and equity—to respond to the challenges mentioned above. The initial purpose of the SAM was as a tool that measures the trade-off between immediate economic gains and long-term ecological considerations [39]. The original mission of the SAM somehow emphasized individual needs and resource accumulation over ecology and equal welfare. This could be related to Maslow’s hierarchy theory.

To some degree, the initial stage of the SAM was synergy with CSA to expand access to food, nutrients, financial resources, sustainability, and social equity. Both of these systems are products of human development, but their influence is nowhere near that of other policies or influential events. Surprisingly, they have aligned proposals in some areas, supported each other in various places, and spread the ideology of sustainable agriculture to other parts of the world.

It is noteworthy that a relative scarcity of articles on the distribution stage and across the “environment” dimension were also observed, but this aligns with the CSA’s emphasis on local food systems [44] and the promotion of short food supply chains [9]. Beyond that, the dot intersects the “health and education” dimension, and the distribution stage is so tiny that it is not noticed, which indicates that rarely an article probes into the mechanism behind health and distribution under the CSA subject. It is not hard to see the reason why there are few reviews [32,40,54] about CSA, and none of them specify the research that involves these two classified indicators.

The graphical representation not only underscores the prevalent research themes but also illuminates areas ripe for future exploration, signaling potential research gaps and opportunities for advancing the understanding of CSA’s multi-dimensional impacts (Figure 5), as well as determining how quantitative research needs to be applied in “environment” and “health and education” dimensions to measure the specific impact of CSA (Figure 5). It is a relief that the Sustainable Agriculture Mechanism (SAM) has transformed into a new form. The new form encompasses sustainable agriculture based on three pillars: environmental, economic, and social dimensions, which cover all Sustainable Development Goal (specifically SDG 2.4.1), themes, and indicators. CSA and SAM complement each other, both of which share the same values and make quantitative assessments of CSA’s potential gaps using SAM indicators.

3.2.2. Lack of Environmental Topic Research

In our comprehensive analysis, we initially identified a total of 1335 original author keywords, supplemented by an additional 435 title-based keywords. Following meticulous processing of these keywords, we distilled a set of 91 unique keywords, each occurring with a frequency greater than three. It is noteworthy that keywords indicative of geographic locations were excluded from this count. The most frequently occurring keywords, which topped the list, were “alternative food network” and “local food”, each cited 29 times, followed by “sustainability” with 17 mentions, and “local food system” with 14. Other notable keywords included “farmer”, “short food supply chain”, “urban agriculture”, “CSA membership”, “direct food marketing”, and “organic farming”, each with a frequency of 10 or more.

To gain further insights into the key research areas within the CSA framework, we classified the keywords into specific thematic categories, including economy and society, health and education, and environment (see Figure 6). This categorization was visually enhanced by assigning different colors to keywords in each dimension, facilitating an intuitive understanding of their distribution. Beyond the criteria of the Sustainable Agriculture Matrix (SAM), these dimensions are in line with the broader concept of a food system that integrates sustainability into its social, economic, and ecological activities, intending to eliminate hunger and improve dietary quality [42].

Our results corroborate the notion that CSA is perceived as an alternative food network, with manifestations in organic farming, sustainable agriculture, and urban agriculture, particularly within the environmental dimension. While the “society” and “economy” domains garnered the highest number of keywords, indicating a prevalent focus among researchers, the “health and education” domain followed closely. The relatively lower frequency of keywords in the environmental subject suggests a potential gap in attention, indicating an opportunity for future research to explore the ecological impacts of CSA more deeply [55].

Conversely, the notable presence of the keyword “alternative food network” within the environmental domain highlights its significance. This reflects a recognition of CSA’s role in mediating dietary effects and emphasizes the model’s potential as a conduit for social and economic benefits, as indicated by the high number of articles in these categories. The distribution of keyword hotspots across the social and economic dimension nearly accounts for half of all keywords, mirroring the classification results that show a concentration of research in the areas of consumption and socio-economic impact.

3.3. Research Trend and Topic Relevance from the Past 22 Years

Our research has identified a notable shift in the frequency of specific keywords within the recent literature (2020–2023) compared to the preceding period (2016–2019), indicating emerging trends in CSA research (see Figure 7). Keywords that have shown a significant increase in the recent period are likely to reflect growing areas of interest (illustrated in light blue). The terms “local food” and “urban” have been present since 2008–2011, but there has been a notable shift in the 2020–2023 period, with “urban” being supplanted by “urban agriculture”. This evolution suggests a pivot in research focus from urban studies two decades ago to a more agriculture-centric perspective in recent years. This shift may be interpreted as a progression beyond the basic physiological needs toward objectives that encompass broader aspects of sustainability and food systems development [28].

The keyword “alternative food network” has emerged as a hotspot in the recent period, underscoring its continued relevance and suggesting that alternative food systems are gaining ground as integral components of the food system. This aligns with the trend that positions alternative food networks as potential catalysts for a revival in food system development [56]. Additionally, the keyword “low-income” gained prominence in the 2016–2019 period and has become even more popular in recent years, highlighting the persistent challenge of improving dietary quality and nutrient intake among low-income populations [35]. This underscores an ongoing research focus on addressing disparities in food access and nutrition, which also dispels doubts about CSA practices in a broader spreading path. Few articles draw a conclusion about CSA’s characteristic of being “exclusive”, which indicates that the consumptive subjects of CSA are “highly educated” [40], “white-female”, with a certain “income” [57]. It also shows the possibility of this exclusiveness of CSA being noticed around 2016 when many articles started to perform test experiments for transforming the model of CSA to be more inclusive.

Upon examination of the visual representations, including the circle figure and thermal figure, it is evident that recent research has concentrated significantly on the dimensions of health and environment. A substantial number of keywords from the recent period fall within these two dimensions, reflecting a heightened awareness of the role of CSA in environmental sustainability and health and education. Furthermore, the increased visibility of keywords such as “food system transformation” and “nutrition education” indicates a societal shift in focus from merely addressing hunger to a deeper examination of proper diet structures, which also gives a hint that the temporal changes of the SAM follow experiences from promoting food security to pursuing sustainable agriculture in three dimensions. Beyond that, the two keywords “sustainability” and “local food” are shown from 2008 till 2023, stressing to build up the connection among agroecology, producers, and consumers, which means these two keywords represent part of the core mission of CSA since 2008. It concretes that the environment is growing to be the main focus of the hierarchy of needs. This transition reflects a broader societal movement towards understanding and implementing more holistic and sustainable food systems.

The evidence from these three aspects, the result of the temporal trend of keywords under the CSA subject, the evolvement of the SAM, and Maslow’s theory of achieving self-realization, all prove that humans have experienced a historical transition. This shift may be interpreted as a progression beyond the basic physiological needs towards objectives that encompass broader aspects of sustainability and food systems development, which could be connected with the theory of Maslow [28]. The need for self-achievement or self-fulfillment must be met after physiological needs are secured.

4. Affinity between the Theory of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs and CSA

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory posits that the human historical process is driven by a progression of needs at various stages. By applying this theoretical framework to evaluate the merits of CSA, we find a coherent and rational alignment. The temporal trend analysis of keywords indicates that CSA emphasizes a way of obtaining and farming healthier food in its infancy (1999–2008), which could be shown by the keywords “organic farming”, “direct market” and “local food”. The initial introduction of community-supported agriculture (CSA) provides access to “organic farming”, aiming to fulfill basic physiological needs. Human beings are suffering from the dominant food system [34], which is increasingly applying intensive production methods and depending on external inputs such as fertilizers, pesticides, and yield crops [58]. The direct outcomes of maintaining dominant food systems are loss of arable land, growing concern about the quality of food, and collapsing the environment that humans depend on, which all provide the most basic needs. Over time, the result of the temporal trend of keywords is increasingly recognized as an “alternative food network” dedicated to fostering sustainable, “short supply chain”, and humane local food systems by bridging the gap between urban “consumers” and “small-holder farms”. Therefore, the trend of alternative food networks emerges to shift the weight from going after production efficiency to fixing the basic food system.

Upon examining the congruence between Maslow’s theory and the functional aspects of CSA, it becomes evident that CSA addresses the needs at each stage of the hierarchy (Figure 1). Fundamentally, CSA serves to provide the public with healthy and accessible food, fulfilling the basic physiological needs that are essential for survival [40]. Advancing to the safety stage, CSA initiatives combat food insecurity [13] and ensure equitable access to food for all members of society [9]. In addition, the keywords “food sovereignty”, and “food security”, symbolize the basic needs of society as well. If we regard society as an organization, then each individual’s basic needs would be the basic needs of the organization. The precondition of pursuing psychological needs is ensuring that individuals have safe food and enough material to produce. CSA could be the answer to that. In some research, it is proven that CSA could reduce the cost of production and bring back the vitality of the city [59].

Satisfying the basic and safety needs lays the groundwork for the subsequent stages of social needs, where CSA plays a pivotal role in establishing social connections and a sense of community. One of the core principles of CSA is to foster mutual reciprocity and empowerment between producers and consumers [55], involving farmers and members who assume various social roles [16]. This approach not only strengthens social cohesion but also promotes alternative food systems. Reflecting on the origins of CSA, we observe that its early adopters were motivated by a desire to rehabilitate the land and nature, or to achieve personal fulfillment through engagement in CSA activities [15]. This motivation resonates with Maslow’s theory, which emphasizes the pursuit of meaningful aspirations and inspiration to realize one’s potential.

In the past, the connection between small communities and individuals was more intimate compared to the present. People from the neighborhood were dedicated to community activities such as community-supported agricultural gardens and farmers’ markets. This provided a sense of belonging and helped build relationships with like-minded individuals. Some CSA members join CSA not just to access fresh local food but to “meet like-minded folks” or “participate in farm events” [57]. This shows that the function of CSA is not simply locally providing healthy food, or sustainably growing food. It also endows the power of building up a community to share the risk of production with farmers and other stakeholders in the food system, providing social needs and friendship to achieve a reputation or motivation.

Finally, the highest stage of Maslow’s hierarchy, self-actualization, is exemplified by the transformative potential of CSA. By facilitating mutual commitments among producers, consumers, and nature, CSA explores alternative food systems that transcend traditional models, contributing to a more ethical and humane approach to food production and consumption [16]. Human beings are no longer selfish, caring only about self and capital resources, but instead consider conserving our mother earth in a mutually beneficial way.

5. Future Direction

Further research within the realm of CSA must prioritize the evaluation of environmental and ecosystem performance, including a detailed assessment of the carbon footprint associated with CSA practices and the dynamics of nutrient flows within these systems. The trajectory of CSA research extends beyond a mere strategy for achieving food security; it represents a holistic lifestyle pattern aimed at fostering equity and inclusion. CSA has already emerged as a social innovation, disrupting traditional market monopolies by creating a more equitable platform for both farmers and consumers. However, the impact of CSA has yet to reach its full potential, necessitating the engagement of a broader spectrum of stakeholders, including scientific institutions and governmental bodies. To fully comprehend the scope and implications of CSA, it is essential to view it through the lens of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This perspective underscores that the pursuit of CSA is not solely about meeting basic physiological needs but is also about ascending through the stages of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. According to this psychological framework, humans progress through a series of needs, starting with physiological essentials and culminating with self-actualization.

6. Limitations

While our review study provides a unique viewpoint on the development of CSA from the theory of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, it faces three limitations. First, as a systematic literature review, the methodology for processing raw keywords is not standardized enough to be applicable in other fields. There are new advanced computer techniques, such as R packages, which could be helpful to make keywords abstract without subjective interference. According to this review, the model of keyword analysis used could be followed with other similar studies to dig into the hotspots and future directions. Since the number of articles included in this study (only from one database) is not enormous, a simple statistical tool is feasible. If variable conditions need to be abstracted and processed from databases, an information technology strategy may need to be required. Second, as we mentioned earlier, we only included one database in this study. It would be more comprehensive if we could include more than one database. The information on keywords and hotspots may be broader than our findings suggest. Last, we did not obtain any quantitative findings regarding the statistics of the selected paper. Specifically, as the environmental aspect of CSA, quantitative analysis could offer more precise and objective insights into the potential of CSA in sustainability. Therefore, this review is only an attempt, and other databases need to be included to focus on more delicate angles to explore the deeper effects of CSA.

7. Conclusions

This systematic review has established community-supported agriculture (CSA) as a keystone for sustainable and equitable food systems. One of the findings shows a pronounced upswing in CSA research, notably over the past decade, which reflects that research might be motivated by the COVID-19 pandemic and the recognition of sustainable agriculture around the globe. Another finding indicates that the screened articles, categorized by SAM dimensions, are mainly concentrated in the “economy and society” dimension, outnumbering those in the “environment” dimension by a ratio of more than four to one. It suggests that the environmental topic of CSA would be one of the future directions. We also demonstrated how a synergy between the evolution of the SAM and the development of CSA mirrors a worldwide trend favoring models that emphasize local production, environmental sustainability, and social inclusivity. Furthermore, the keyword hotspot findings highlight CSA’s convergence with escalating societal needs, aligning with the progressive stages of Maslow’s hierarchy. It could be presented by the increased focus on “local food”, “alternative food networks”, and “nutrition education” in recent studies, indicating a paradigm shift. This shift reflects a growing commitment to health, education, and sustainability within the food system. In addition, the distribution of keywords by category dimensions reveals that the “environment” dimension has the fewest keywords compared to the combined total of keywords in the “economy” and “society” dimensions. The number of keywords under the “health and education” dimension is second less. The awakening of a sustainable food system and being moral is unconsciously influenced.

Moving forward, CSA initiatives should prioritize environmental stewardship, particularly in reducing carbon footprints, as an integral aspect of their operations. Policies must be crafted to nurture CSA models that guarantee equitable access to nutritious food with a spotlight on serving marginalized communities. The role of CSA in nutrition education should be amplified to bolster public health. Research efforts should concentrate on formulating economically viable CSA models that ensure enduring sustainability. There is an acute demand for quantitative research to assess the environmental and social impacts of CSA, which is essential for shaping evidence-based policies. The capacity of CSA to tackle the intricate challenges of contemporary food systems is evident. With deliberate support and research, CSA is poised to pioneer a future for food systems that are sustainable, equitable, and conducive to public health.