Are Local Food Chains More Sustainable than Global Food Chains? Considerations for Assessment

Sustainability

Talis Tisenkopfs¹  Mario Giampietro²  Carin Rougoor³  Julie Smith⁴  Tim Lang⁴  Kees de Roest⁵  James Kirwan⁶  Francesca Galli⁷  Gianluca Brunori⁷  Erik Mathijs⁸  Jana Schwarz⁸  Zaklina Stojanovic⁹  Luca Colombo^1,10  Jean-Marc Touzard^1,11  Rudolf van Broekhuizen^1,12  Damian Maye^1,13  Emilia Schmitt^1,14  Dominique Barjolle^1,14 

[1] Baltic Studies Centre, LV1014 Riga, Latvia;Catalan Institution for Research and Advanced Studies (ICREA), 08010 Barcelona, Spain;Centre for Agriculture and Environment Foundation (CLM), 4104 BA Culemborg, The Netherlands;Centre for Food Policy, City University, London EC1V 0HB, UK;Centro Ricerche Produzioni Animali S.p.A.—C.R.P.A. S.p.A., 42121 Reggio Emilia, Italy;Countryside and Community Research Institute, University of Gloucestershire, Cheltenham GL50 2RH, UK;Department of Agriculture, Food and Environment, University of Pisa, 56124 Pisa, Italy;Division of Bioeconomics, Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, KU Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium;Faculty of Economics, University of Belgrade, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia;Fondazione Italiana per la Ricerca in Agricoltura Biologica e Biodinamica, 00153 Roma, Italy;Inra, UMR Innovation, 34060 Montpellier, France;Rural Sociology Group, Wageningen University, 6708 PB Wageningen, The Netherlands;Spain and Institute of Environmental Science and Technology, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra, Spain;Sustainable Agroecosystems Group, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zürich ETH, 8092 Zürich, Switzerland;

关键词: local;    global;    food supply chain;    sustainability;    assessment;    reflexive governance;    post-normal science;   

DOI  :  10.3390/su8050449

来源: DOAJ

【 摘 要 】

This paper summarizes the main findings of the GLAMUR project which starts with an apparently simple question: is “local” more sustainable than “global”? Sustainability assessment is framed within a post-normal science perspective, advocating the integration of public deliberation and scientific research. The assessment spans 39 local, intermediate and global supply chain case studies across different commodities and countries. Assessment criteria cover environmental, economic, social, health and ethical sustainability dimensions. A closer view of the food system demonstrates a highly dynamic local–global continuum where actors, while adapting to a changing environment, establish multiple relations and animate several chain configurations. The evidence suggests caution when comparing “local” and “global” chains, especially when using the outcomes of the comparison in decision-making. Supply chains are analytical constructs that necessarily—and arbitrarily—are confined by system boundaries, isolating a set of elements from an interconnected whole. Even consolidated approaches, such as Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), assess only a part of sustainability attributes, and the interpretation may be controversial. Many sustainability attributes are not yet measurable and “hard” methodologies need to be complemented by “soft” methodologies which are at least able to identify critical issues and trade-offs. Aware of these limitations, our research shows that comparing local and global chains, with the necessary caution, can help overcome a priori positions that so far have characterized the debate between “localists” and “globalists”. At firm level, comparison between “local” and “global” chains could be useful to identify best practices, benchmarks, critical points, and errors to avoid. As sustainability is not a status to achieve, but a never-ending process, comparison and deliberation can be the basis of a “reflexive governance” of food chains.

【 授权许可】

Unknown