Papers that meet the criteria of papers selection are analyzed and classified. As aforementioned, the selected 16 papers are classified into three categories, i.e., interdependencies, coordination mechanisms, and methodology. The analysis of each classification is explained as follows:
Coordination based on its interdependencies
The low number of selected papers in Table 1 shows that studies on agri-food supply chain coordination are rarely conducted. Besides, the publishing dates of the papers indicate that the studies in this area are relatively new and have just gained attention in the last recent years. However, there is a growing interest in conducting research on this topic. The growing interest is apparent because the selected papers are dominated by recently published ones.
Interdependencies among actors in agri-food supply chain based on their activities are affected by the final product(s) offered by the chain to end customers. For fruits and vegetables, two kinds of final products offered are fresh produce and processed fruits and vegetables [18, 44]. Activity that distinguishes one another is processing, where fresh produce does not have to go through the process. The consequence is the shorter deterioration time of fresh produce compared to products that have gone through processing stage. On the contrary, the presence of processing activity may add to the cost of supply chain and the numbers of actors involved, making supply chain coordination more complex. Furthermore, issues discussed in agri-food supply chain coordination are varied. The dominating issues are supply chain contract [12, 54] and price mechanism [14, 37]. Other issues related to coordination deal with climate change, the use of power to create coordination in an agri-food supply chain, coordination mechanisms to manage interdependencies, and activities or applications that require coordination.
The papers being reviewed illustrate all of important activities that should be considered in an agri-food supply chain. Activities ranging from agri-input supply to distribution and sales to end customers are discussed in these papers. However, none gives a holistic view of supply chain coordination in agri-food. All of them partially discuss coordination in agri-food supply chains. They only discuss two or three parts of the chains that need to be coordinated and do not pay attention to the entire chains. In fact, issue as such is related to all actors involved in the whole chain. Maintaining the relationship or coordination between actors is hence complex, because each actor has its own objectives or goals. Due to their limited focus and coverage, the papers do not consider dynamic relationships among actors in their models.
Another finding from the review is that coordination in agri-food supply chain is in fact dominated by the coordination between farmers and processors. It suggests that studies on the coordination of processed fruits and vegetables products have been more widely studied than the coordination of fresh produce. Coordination has become very important when fresh produce is associated with food safety. Since fresh produce does not require any further processing, it has a shorter deterioration time and is more easily contaminated. Furthermore, there is a need for researches on methods to help customers track and trace fresh produce being consumed, so that food safety is improved . The survey suggests the use of radio frequency identification (RFID) as a way to achieve more accurate product identification. The technology helps actors in a supply chain share their data to one another.
Furthermore, a larger number of the reviewed papers discuss modern channels in their supply chain than those discussing traditional channels. It indicates that supply chain associated with modern channels requires more coordination than those associated with traditional ones. It occurs because in modern channels a higher attention is supposedly addressed to specification, availability and sustainability . To meet these requirements, modern channels require supply chain actors to coordinate with one another. In addition, a study conducted by Sutopo et al.  has attempted to investigate coordination between farmers and modern retailers in handling deteriorated products in corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities. The CSR activities of modern channels are aimed at educating farmers to enhance their business skills and to reduce the impact of deterioration. In modern channels, therefore, product specifications, delivery terms, and internal business requirements are possible to achieve.
Coordination mechanism taken in managing interdependencies
Agri-food supply chain coordination is achieved by applying coordination mechanisms. Supply chain contract is the most common coordination mechanism taken in agri-food supply chains. Contracts are taken to coordinate supply chain members to have better supplier and buyer relationship and risk management. The contracts specify parameters that need to be considered by farmers for fulfilling buyers’ demand, i.e., required area of farmland, required number of workers, the types of vegetables to grow, required agri-inputs such as fertilizer and seed, quality standards, delivery dates, financial risk allocations, bonuses and penalties, incentive alignments, clear targets, and result expectations.
A supply chain contract is commonly taken when coordination in agri-food supply chain only involves two actors. A study conducted by Kuwornu et al.  has examined contract supply arrangements among farmers, food processors, and retailers. The study attempts to assess interactions among farmers, food processors, and retailers by looking at contracts as well as assessing the impacts of incentives, coordination costs, and risk strategies on interaction. The study is conducted on the supply chain of Dutch potatoes. It indicates that the increase in incentives for producers and wholesalers would significantly decrease coordination costs in the marketing channel.
It is interesting to note that a research conducted by Chambers and King  has found that supply chain contract is not effective in maintaining the relationship between actors regarding new types of products. In contrast, other approaches, e.g., quality monitoring, certification-making procedures, and reputation, are found to be highly important. The condition applies when quality uncertainty has been a key problem, and contract enforcement is difficult due to expensive monitoring.
Furthermore, the Belaya and Henrich’s  work also describes the use of power as a tool in managing supply chain coordination in agri-food. It is rather critical than other tools such as information sharing, joint decision-making, supply chain contracts, and collective learning. In particular, the study is aimed at finding the role of power in managing supply chain networks and its effects on coordination. The authors attempts to categorize power into six types and applies semi-structured in-depth expert interviews with processing companies under investigation to develop a special ranking system for the use of each type of power. Then, the study shows that behavioral aspect is also an important aspect for being considered in a coordination process.
The other tools of coordination mechanism, i.e., information sharing, joint decision-making, and collective learning, are also taken to promote a harmonious relationship and to solve conflicts between actors in an agri-food supply chain, as discussed by Sutopo et al. , Usuga et al. , Villegas et al. , and Zylbersztajn and Miele .
Several authors have identified that more than one type of coordination mechanism might be taken to maintain coordination within a supply chain of agri-foods [50, 54]. The authors argue that more than one coordination mechanisms could be required because agri-food supply chain is a multistage activity and may act as enabling activities that involve more than two actors with different objectives and characteristics.
The effects on supply chain performance, when a coordination mechanism is being implemented, are varied, e.g., cost reduction, profit increase, quality improvement, higher productivity, food safety improvement, real knowledge basis construction, and long-term relationship maintenance. However, not all reviewed papers show how the effect is measured. Most of these papers only look at the effects of a coordination mechanism that has been successfully implemented in a particular case and assume that the same effects would occur if the same coordination mechanism is applied to another case.
The implementation of decision-making level of coordination mechanism varies in strategic, tactical, and operational levels. As Table 2 shows coordination mechanism is dominated by the application of supply chain contracts, usually relating to tactical and operational decisions [12, 23, 44, 46, 50, 54]. In contrast, the supply chain contract for a strategic level receives little attention. Only one paper utilizes supply chain contracts or agreements in their supply chain to maintain its long-term relationship . The paper suggests that it is necessary to make agreements among supply chain members for gaining confidence of other supply chain members and for having clear targets and expectation about the results of a long-term relationship. On the other hand, other coordination mechanisms are dominated by the implementation at operational level. Then, many short-term decisions related to the improvement in quality agri-food products must also be addressed.
Methodology taken in addressing interdependencies and assessing coordination mechanism
The most common methodology taken to describe supply chain coordination in agri-food chains is the case study. Seven of 16 papers focus on particular case studies. In addition, case studies are often taken to describe the process of coordination that occurs in an agri-food supply chain. The approach may give an overview on the field but may hardly provide alternative solutions applicable for agri-food supply chain coordination.
In fact, researches on agri-food supply chain coordination are dominated by the use of mathematical modeling as a methodology to address interdependencies and assess coordination mechanism. Most of these analytical approaches utilize deterministic variables and cannot accommodate the specific characteristics of agricultural products. The papers that contain an analytical approach investigate the coordination between two supply chain actors [12, 14].
Then, simulation is a less preferred approach in agri-food supply chain coordination. There is only one work in which simulation approach is utilized . Villegas et al.  have simulated and analyzed climate change impacts on agriculture and could finally propose a set of adaptation measures to be considered in determining the purpose of supply chain coordination in agri-food sector. However, simulation approach in the study is not taken to show the process of coordination that occurs between actors involved in the agri-food supply chain under investigation and do not provide an alternative coordination mechanism to manage supply chain coordination. The detail list of methodology taken in addressing interdependencies and assessing coordination mechanism is shown in Table 3.