Stated theoretical aim (theory elaboration), unit of analysis and justification of case study; described logic and criteria applied for case selection to allow analytical generalization

To be able to transfer results to different contexts, the food system shortly described. However, some aspects of the informants are not included to allow for anonymity

Data on different actors' view and context to enable comparison with other contexts

Results presented to knowledgeable researchers to check for transferability

Pilot interview with one informant to test interview questions based on guiding framework

Conducted cross-actor analysis considering different discontents, interventions and mechanisms

Explicated the interrelations between key constructs; used different bodies of literature (SCRM, risk governance) to interpret findings

Case and informants selected following a structured and purposeful sampling approach

Involved multiple informants (representing different actors and perspectives on governance) to compare, contrast and triangulate responses

Used a literature-based guiding framework

Informants respond similarly to the same problems and mechanisms

Investor triangulation: two researchers discussed and judged data and interpretations

The raw data (transcripts) put into software (NVIVO) and then coded on different levels (1st, 2nd, 3rd) to connect it with different theoretical categories

Presented results to peer researchers (from some and other disciplines) familiar with the studied phenomenon to check and obtain feedback about case analysis

Described the method choices and the research design; part of the paper has been through scientific review processes for conference

Conducted systematic data collection

Details on how the data is collected in the method chapter to assure integrity of results

Multiple perspectives and sources of data collected (interviews, presentations, inquires, reports and websites). Primary and secondary data are triangulated and used to augment data

Involved multiple respondents (representing different internal perspectives and actors)

Interview guide provided

Engaged peer researchers to review research protocol and interview guide

Gave examples of detailed quotes and first level-coding

Engaged researchers from other disciplines familiar with the studied phenomenon to obtain feedback on case analysis and framework development

Guiding framework presented to respondents to compare and contrast views

Terminology and guiding framework explained to informants to avoid misunderstanding

Triangulated data using multiple sources of evidence (interviews, internal presentations, industry reports, websites) to triangulate respondent responses

Illustrated the chain of evidence using matrices, tables and figures.

Conducted first-, second- and third-level coding and aggregation illustrated in coding tree

The method choices and the research design described

Explained data analysis procedures

Preliminary results presented at conferences to get input from other researchers

Developed a standardized interview guide for data collection across the informants

Developed and continuously updated a case study database (including, secondary and archival sources, interview transcriptions, themes, codes and memos) to ensure complete documentation of the data analysis procedure

Displayed data in different structures, like coding-tree and tables, to facilitate cross-informants analysis and find pattern

Explained interrelations between key concepts (the framework) and triangulated different literature (SCRM, risk governance)