6533b856fe1ef96bd12b1ea2
RESEARCH PRODUCT
Are local food chains more sustainable than global food chains? Considerations for assessment
Mario GiampietroFrancesca GalliJean-marc TouzardJulie SmithTalis TisenkopfsDominique BarjolleZaklina StojanovicCarin RougoorGianluca BrunoriDamian MayeErik MathijsJana SchwarzLuca ColomboTim LangJames KirwanRudolf Van BroekhuizenEmilia SchmittKees De Roestsubject
HDassessment[SDV]Life Sciences [q-bio]Geography Planning and DevelopmentHB0211 other engineering and technologiesWASS02 engineering and technology010501 environmental sciencesSB175_Foodlocal;global;food supply chain;sustainability;assessment;reflexive governance;post-normal science01 natural sciencesRenewable energy sources[SHS]Humanities and Social Sciencesfood supply chain11. SustainabilityEconomicsGE1-350local; global; food supply chain; sustainability; assessment; reflexive governance; post-normal sciencemedia_common2. Zero hungerEnvironmental effects of industries and plantsreflexive governanceManagement scienceCorporate governance021107 urban & regional planningGlobalglobalsustainabilityRural SociologyLocalSustainabilityFood supply chainFood systemsRurale SociologieReflexive governanceS1Process (engineering)Best practiceSupply chainmedia_common.quotation_subjectTJ807-830Management Monitoring Policy and LawAssessmentTD194-19512. Responsible consumptionlocal0105 earth and related environmental sciencesRenewable Energy Sustainability and the Environmentpost-normal sciencePost-normal scienceEnvironmental economicsDeliberationEnvironmental sciencesPost-normal science13. Climate actionSustainabilityLocal; Global; Food supply chain; Sustainability; Assessment; Reflexive governance; Post-normal sciencedescription
© 2016 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. 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 prioripositions 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. ispartof: Sustainability vol:8 issue:5 status: published
| year | journal | country | edition | language |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016-05-06 |