Priority setting between local versus global food chains continues to be subject of debate among food, rural and agricultural scholars with an interest in how to support more sustainable food provision and consumption patterns. Recently the FP7 European GLAMUR project targeted to assess and compare the performances of local versus global food chains in a systematic way covering multiple performance dimensions. Especially drawing on empirical research on the performances of three Italian and three Dutch pork chains, it will be argued that meaningful performance comparison needs to acknowledge the complex, multi-facetted and time and place specific interaction patterns between (more) global and (more) local pork chains. Therefore, as regards these pork chains, local-global performance comparison is thought to have hardly significance in isolation from complementary "horizontal" (place-based) and "circular" (waste or by-product valorization oriented) assessments. As will be concluded, this methodological complexity of food chain performance comparison doesn't allow for simple statements regarding the pros and cons of (more) global versus (more) local pork chains. Hence, it is recommended to avoid such less fruitful local-global dichotomy and to concentrate on more policy relevant questions as: how to facilitate fundamentally different resource-use-efficiency strategies and how to optimize the place-specific interaction between more "local" versus more "global" food systems?

Sense and non-sense of local-global food chain comparison, empirical evidence from Dutch and Italian pork case studies / Oostindie, Henk; Van Broekhuizen, Rudolf; De Roest, Kees; Belletti, Giovanni; Arfini, Filippo; Menozzi, Davide; Hees, Eric. - In: SUSTAINABILITY. - ISSN 2071-1050. - 8:4(2016), p. 319. [10.3390/su8040319]

Sense and non-sense of local-global food chain comparison, empirical evidence from Dutch and Italian pork case studies

ARFINI, Filippo;MENOZZI, Davide;
2016

Abstract

Priority setting between local versus global food chains continues to be subject of debate among food, rural and agricultural scholars with an interest in how to support more sustainable food provision and consumption patterns. Recently the FP7 European GLAMUR project targeted to assess and compare the performances of local versus global food chains in a systematic way covering multiple performance dimensions. Especially drawing on empirical research on the performances of three Italian and three Dutch pork chains, it will be argued that meaningful performance comparison needs to acknowledge the complex, multi-facetted and time and place specific interaction patterns between (more) global and (more) local pork chains. Therefore, as regards these pork chains, local-global performance comparison is thought to have hardly significance in isolation from complementary "horizontal" (place-based) and "circular" (waste or by-product valorization oriented) assessments. As will be concluded, this methodological complexity of food chain performance comparison doesn't allow for simple statements regarding the pros and cons of (more) global versus (more) local pork chains. Hence, it is recommended to avoid such less fruitful local-global dichotomy and to concentrate on more policy relevant questions as: how to facilitate fundamentally different resource-use-efficiency strategies and how to optimize the place-specific interaction between more "local" versus more "global" food systems?
Sense and non-sense of local-global food chain comparison, empirical evidence from Dutch and Italian pork case studies / Oostindie, Henk; Van Broekhuizen, Rudolf; De Roest, Kees; Belletti, Giovanni; Arfini, Filippo; Menozzi, Davide; Hees, Eric. - In: SUSTAINABILITY. - ISSN 2071-1050. - 8:4(2016), p. 319. [10.3390/su8040319]
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11381/2811191
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 13
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 11
social impact