SHORT FOOD SUPPLY CHAINS FOR PROMOTING LOCAL FOOD ON LOCAL MARKETS

INCLUSIVE AND SUSTAINABLE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT Acknowledgements

This document was prepared by Giovanni Belletti and Andrea Marescotti, Professors at the Department of Economics and Management at the University of Firenze, Italy, under the guidance of Fabio Russo, Senior Industrial Development Officer at UNIDO and with the contributions of Nuria Ackermann, UNIDO Chief Technical Advisor, Project of Market Access of Agri-food and Terroir products (PAMPAT), Tunisia, Ebe Muschialli, UNIDO Associate Industrial Development Expert, and Sabrina Arcuri, University of Firenze. The authors wish to acknowledge the valuable comments provided by Michele Clara, Senior Industrial Development Officer, UNIDO.

The document is part of the activity of the Department of Trade, Investment, and Innovation (TII) of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO).

Disclaimer

This document has been produced without formal United Nations editing.

The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this document do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries, or its economic system or degree of development. Designations such as “developed”, “industrialized” and “developing” are intended for statistical convenience and do not necessarily express a judgment about the stage reached by a particular country or area in the development process. Mention of firm names or commercial products does not constitute an endorsement by UNIDO. The opinions, figures and estimates set forth are the responsibility of the authors and should not necessarily be considered as reflecting the views or carrying the endorsement of UNIDO.

Comments

Comments and suggestions on issues raised in this report are welcome and may be addressed to Fabio Russo at [email protected].

Copyright © by the United Nations Industrial Development Organization, 2020

LOCAL FOODCONTENTS FOR LOCAL MARKETS

List of abbreviations 1 Introduction 2

1. Conceptual framework 4 1.1. Defining short food supply-chains 4 1.2. “Short” or “alternative” food supply-chains? 6 1.3. Short food supply-chains and “local food” 8

2. The variety of short food supply-chains initiatives 10 2.1. On-farm selling 10 2.2. Farmers’ markets 13 2.3. Farmers’ shops, box schemes 17 2.4. Consumers-driven initiatives 18 2.5. Public (collective) procurement 21 2.6. Hotels, Restaurants, Catering (HoReCa) 22 2.7. The many dimensions of SFSCs initiatives 22

3. Display the potential of SFSCs 25 3.1. Short food supply-chains: a win-win game? 25 3.2. Expected benefits for producers 26 3.3. Expected benefits for consumers 28 3.4. Expected benefits for society 31

4. Effectiveness of Short Food Supply-Chains 33 4.1. Key-functions in SFSC and effectiveness 33 4.2. Coordination and governance functions, and the issue of 34 price regulation and risk sharing 4.3. Logistic functions, and the issue of food hubs 37 4.4. Information and guarantee functions, and the issue of common labelling 41

5. The way forward. Some reflections for action 44

References 47

Annex - UNIDO case study 50 Boosting market access and local development of the fig farmers’ community of Djebba, Tunisia

List of Boxes 52 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

List of abbreviations

AAFN: Alternative agri-food networks CSA: Community supported agriculture EU: European Union PYO: Pick-your-own SDG: Sustainability development goal SFSC: Short food supply chain SPG: Solidarity purchasing group

1 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

Introduction

In recent decades, the agri-food system has distribution, and this explains why this model been subject to rapid and deep changes. A has spread and is currently dominant at world number of demographic, political, social, level. However, this model is raising concerns technical, economic, and cultural factors and is subject to criticisms under many points has led to the emergence of an industrialized of view, among which difficult access to market model of food provisioning, where large- to smallholders and small and medium enter- scale food processing firms and supermarkets prises, environment pollution, and menace chains dominate the scene in the framework to food safety and nutrition appear the most of a growingly globalized food system. important ones (Renting et al., 2003, Ilbery Consumers’ behaviour and needs did and Maye, 2005, Sonnino and Marsden, 2006). change too, due to the evolution of society and economic systems. Urbanization is one of the main factors that distance the places of agricultural production from those of food consumption, which asks for a growing number of connections (transport, storage, packaging, processing) carried out by a plural- ity of actors. Moreover, both income growth and changes in work organisation and family structure ask for improved services incorpo- rated into food. In order to achieve scale economies and cut production costs, the industrialized model of food provisioning forced farms to specialize on a few products and phases of the produc- tion process. Consequently, farmers gradually stopped performing direct delivery to final consumers, as well as processing their prod- Contest of typical food products in Morocco ucts on-farm, thus delegating food processing and distribution to specialized firms outside The high number of steps, and the increasing the borders of the farm, increasing the number distance between production and consump- of steps between agricultural production and tion, are at the basis of the “revolution” final consumption. brought by Short Food Supply-Chains initia- Today, food processing industry and distri- tives (SFSCs), especially in Europe and in the bution are asked to provide a growing number United States, although a number of inter- of functions and operations to meet the new esting opportunities is also pointed out for needs of more and more urbanized consum- other countries, included developing ones ers, thus increasing the geographical, tempo- (Moustier and Renting, 2015). ral, and cultural distance between agricultural The growing interest for SFSCs around production and final consumption. the world, especially from farmers, consum- The industrialized model of food provision- ers and citizens, and public institutions ing seems to be highly efficient in performing (Marsden and Arce, 1995; Aguglia, 2009; Allen these new functions as compared to previ- et al., 2003), witnesses the need for searching ous models of organising production and alternative food systems able to provide some

2 INTRODUCTION LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

Promotion of PDO Djebba figs in a supermarket in Tunis, Tunisia

“functions” that the industrialized model and human settlements more inclusive, safe, seems not able or willing to provide (Anderson, resilient, and sustainable (SDG 11) and to 2008). Expected positive effects from enhanc- Combat climate change and its impacts (SDG ing SFSCs initiatives range from economic 13). With their positive impact on income benefits to both producers and consumers, to generation and job opportunities as well as on strengthening social relations, preserving the building productive capacities in an inclusive environment, improving nutritional aspects, manner, SFSCs can contribute to inclusive and enhancing local development. and sustainable economic growth and indus- Shortening food chains can contrib- trial development (SDG 8 and 9). Finally, ute to more than one of the objectives of SFSCs contribute to diversify food production United Nations Agenda 2030 for Sustainable systems and marketing channels, allowing for Development. In particular, expected effects higher resilience in front of global market of SFSC initiatives can mainly contribute disruption. to Responsible consumption and produc- The United Nations Industrial Development tion (Sustainable Development Goal 12). Organization (UNIDO) is fully committed Moreover, SFSCs can contribute to other to contributing to the achievement of the Sustainable development goals related to above-mentioned SDGs, thus the relevance social issues, in particular Poverty and hunger for the Organization of promoting SFSCs. reduction (SDGs 1 and 2), as well as to enhanc- UNIDO has a long-standing experience in ing gender equality (SDG 5) considering that agri-food value chains development around territorial products are often produced by the globe by fostering business linkages, women. SFCS also contribute to the envi- improving quality compliance, enhancing ronmental ones, specifically Making cities productivity and promoting market access.

INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION 3 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

Since 2010, UNIDO has been implement- market access to smallholders, and higher ing projects valorising food origin-linked food quality to consumers, and to discuss products and shortening food supply chains. how these initiatives may be developed in a These projects ensure that Small and Medium sustainable way. Enterprises (SMEs) and farmers within the Section 1 is devoted to introducing the assisted value chains become the driving force main features of SFSCs and give the general of endogenous process of local development, framework and basic concepts. Section 2 maximizing the potential of agri-food prod- describes the main typologies of SFSC initi- ucts, including the linkages with the tourism atives, together with some dimensions that sector, and that the benefits are fairly distrib- characterize these initiatives. Section 3 analy- uted along the value chain. ses potential benefits and limits of SFSCs for The aim of this paper is to give an insight producers, consumers, and society as a whole, over the main typologies of SFSCs initia- while section 4 focuses on main functions tives, and to discuss their potential benefits affecting the performance of SFSC initiatives. and drawbacks. The ultimate goal is to raise Section 5 draws some conclusions and recom- consciousness on the potential of SFSCs initi- mendations. A UNIDO case study is presented atives for achieving local development, better in the Annex.

1. Conceptual framework

1.1. Defining short food supply-chains production for shopping (farm shops, farm- The term “short food supply-chains” based hospitality and agritourism, roadside (SFSCs) encompasses different typolo- sales, pick-your-own schemes, etc.), and gies and operating models. Farmers might some other types are based on long-term sell their products to consumers in many partnerships between one or more producers ways: off-farm, in the neighbouring places and consumers, where the latter have a say of consumption such as farmers’ markets, in in farmers’ decisions and labour, such as in shops owned by farmers themselves, in food Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) or festivals and fairs, through farm-based deliv- Solidarity Purchasing Groups (SPGs). ery schemes, or through one single trade Broadly speaking, SFCSs aim at reducing intermediary (cooperative shops, specialist the “distance” between agriculture and final shops, supermarkets, etc.). Farmers can also consumption, directly re-connecting farm- sell their products directly to public insti- ers to consumers, and are at the crossroad of tutions’ collective catering, such as school economic, environmental and social issues or hospital canteens, in the framework of and needs. public procurement schemes, and to restau- The shortening of the supply chain may be rants, hotels and private catering companies interpreted under three different points of (HORECA). In some of these cases, SFSCs view: can also correspond to non-local sales, in particular direct internet sales/long distance -- the reduction of the physical distance farm-based delivery schemes (Kneafsey et between the farmer and final consumers; al., 2013). Other types of on-farm schemes -- the reduction of the number of steps that involve consumers travelling to the place of connect the farmer to final consumers;

4 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

-- the increase of cultural and social prox- both products and production process, imity between farmers and consumers. to activate social relationships and participated initiatives, to support SFSCs are often defined according to these local producers, and to contribute to three dimensions, which are not mutually environmental preservation. exclusive1, although they may have differ- ent emphasis depending on the players In other words, objectives pursued may involved and the objectives of the initia- attain to different aspects: tives. Definitions vary according to cultural, political, social, and economic specific -- economic aspects: allow better market contexts where these initiatives are embed- access for small farmers, jumping ded in (EIP-AGRI, 2014)2. Therefore, the marketing middlemen and improve world of SFSC initiatives can be conceived the value distribution along the supply as a universe of different types of connection chain, benefitting farmers to gain between production and consumption (Slee higher value added and/or consumers and Kirwan, 2007; Goodman et al., 2011). to obtain final price reduction (Belletti In the context of SFSCs, farmers and et al., 2010); consumers are the key categories of stake- -- environment / health-nutrition aspects: holders, and the success of the initiatives is reduce the geographical distance often measured comparing outcomes to their between the place of production and of expectations: consumption, which aims at granting

-- farmers’ expectations normally involve prices, in terms of higher level and stability over time, but also other bene- fits such as market diversification, long-lasting trade relations, access to direct information from consumers; moreover, there are “non-economic” expectations too, such as better social gratification, or the awareness of contributing to environment protec- tion; -- consumers’ expectations are equally diverse: from seeking lower prices for food, to access to certain types of prod- ucts and quality attributes (traditional and local products, freshness), to get more information and knowledge of Street food sale in Costa Rica

1 Physical distance reduction and number of steps reduction are not necessarily coincident: indeed, there are chains geographically located but with a high number of intermediate steps, as well as supply chains where the farmer sells directly to an end consumer hundreds or even thousands of miles away. 2 For example, the EU in Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development at art.2.m defines SFSC as “a supply chain involving a limited number of economic operators, committed to co-operation, local economic development, and close geographical and social relations between producers, processors and consumers”. In France the National Ministry of Agriculture defines as short chain (“circuit court”) when there is no more than one intermediary between producers and consumers, thus including those initiatives where the participation of restaurants, canteens, shops is important to foster rural development. In case when both producers and consumers come from the same region, the term short proximity chain (“circuit court de proximité”) will be used (EIP-AGRI, 2014, and http://www.manger-local.fr/circuits-courts/qu-est-ce-que-les-circuits-courts).

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 5 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

higher freshness and quality of food conventional forms of distribution, but to the delivered, guaranteeing its proveni- same industrialized model, as they wish to ence, and reducing the environmental deeply change the rules of the game. impact and other negative environmen- The same happens with reference to the tal externalities (less energy for trans- role of consumers in SFSCs, who normally portation and storage, protecting local recover a more active role than in conven- agro-biodiversity, defending peri-ur- tional supply chains, to the point of becoming ban agricultural land) (Pretty et al., the protagonists and activators of these new 2005; Hogan and Thorpe, 2009); forms of connection (Alkon, 2008). In other -- social aspects: increase the active role words, it is necessary to understand whether of farmers, final consumers, and social the consumer is driven by purely “economic” movements in the agri-food system. principles (the desire to save money), or her The rapprochement between farmers purchasing act responds to ethical and social and consumers makes it possible to principles of “transformative” content, as increase the leading role of these cate- a reaction after years of delegation to, and gories, usually perceived as “passive” in trust in, an increasingly technological and front of the strategies of the interme- globalized agri-food system and its negative diate operators of the agri-food system effects on sustainability. (processing industry, retail), and to In practice, these two visions often inte- activate direct social relationships grate and merge within SFSCs, to the point between farmers and consumers, build- of outlining a continuum of situations that ing new relations of trust, solidarity, are sometimes in contrast and sometimes in participation. agreement with modern channels, in some cases depicting ambiguous situations too (Hand and Martinez, 2010; Durham, King, and 1.2. “Short” or “alternative” food Roheim, 2009). supply-chains? This is also reflected in the evolution of SFSCs are often labelled as “alternative” SFSCs: the first initiatives labelled as SFSCs supply-chains3 (Goodman, DuPuis, and were meant to re-create environmental- Goodman, 2012). The assessment of the ly-sustainable agri-food systems, econom- “alternativeness” of these new forms of ically sound, and socially fair, leaving space connection is normally based on the message for democratic participatory process of conveyed and the ultimate goals of the initi- co-building between producers and consum- atives (Allen et al., 2003; Watts, Ilbery, and ers (Rossi, Brunori, and Guidi, 2008). These Maye, 2005). characteristics have evolved in time when In a first “soft” meaning, SFSCs can be SFSCs have grown and spread in a diversi- seen as just another opportunity to differenti- fied set of typologies, and today we observe ate the ways agri-food products are marketed, a certain tendency to dilution, if not to a real and therefore they are placed side by side erosion, of the original values and objec- with conventional forms of distribution but tives (ecological, ethical, political) (Sonnino without questioning the fundamental princi- and Marsden, 2006; Holloway et al., 2007) ples of industrialized agri-food system. In a and to the growth of importance of purely second “hard” meaning, SFSCs are conceived economic objectives (Kirwan, 2004). This is as carriers of an alternative message, there- also because players belonging to the indus- fore being radically opposed not only to the trialized agri-food system have somehow

3 Some authors have suggested to abandon the term “alternative” to adopt “civic” or “rights-based” (Lamine, 2005).

6 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

Farmers market in New York, USA

“captured” values and symbols of SFSCs are re-territorialising their supply systems in (SUSTAIN, 2008; Mount, 2012). Indeed, order to offer better service (and a renewed given consumers’ attraction to the under- image) for the consumer. lying idea of SFSC, more and more play- Therefore, very significant opportunities ers in food processing industry and both open up for the promotion of short chain traditional and modern distribution firms values, but at the same time there are also are trying to adopt some of their operating risks of unfair competition (i.e. where the mechanisms and some values of the logic of “false” short chain crushes the more “authen- shortening the chain, thus introducing logis- tic” market) and more generally of the dilu- tical and organisational innovations. So we tion of the ideals that marked the first phase see a “local” emphasis in large-scale distri- of development of this innovation. bution, which (when driven by the search In conclusion, the diffusion of the “short”, for authenticity) offers space and visibility “local” and “alternative” forms of connec- to products of local origin. In some cases, tion between production and consumption large-scale retail has entered into agree- cannot be interpreted according to a dichot- ments with “farmers’ markets” by offering omous key with respect to the concepts them space to hold their own events peri- of “long”, “global” and “standard”, as this odically, with the purpose of revitalising its would inevitably lead to neglecting the great image; while some retail chains are consid- complexity and variety of concrete situa- ering the possibility of providing logistics tions. In the real world, “long” and “short” services to joint purchasing groups in their types and logics often integrate and merge, area. At the same time, an increasing number outlining a continuum of situations where of traditional retail and private and public different short supply chains are in competi- catering operators (Brunori and Galli, 2012) tion with each other.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 7 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

Food Quality Label Harissa ready for local supermarkets distribution, Tunisia

1.3. Short food supply-chains and no matter about the number of intermediate “local food” steps the food follows nor its “values”. The An important dimension of SFSCs initiatives only thing that matters is the geographical is related to the concept of “local food”, which distance (miles) between the place of produc- is normally perceived as one of their pillars. tion and the place of consumption, while what Consumers are showing a growing inter- may change is the maximum amount of miles est towards localness of food, perceived as that food has to travel to be still included in having both higher intrinsic quality (more the term “local” (Dunne et al., 2010; Martinez healthy, fresh, and diverse), and the potential et al., 2010). In short, local food is essentially to benefit local community and foster rural a product that has been produced close to the development, environmental preservation, consumption area or, to be more precise, close agrobiodiversity, and social justice, allow- to the place of purchase (a shop, a restaurant, ing the participation of small family farms to a farm). Indeed, physical distance should be market. As Brunori (2007) states, “local food extended to the distance between the place conveys meanings which are strong enough to of production of other inputs (including e.g. potentially detach consumers from conven- pesticides, animal feed) and the farm. When tional food networks and attach them to alter- this whole network of exchanges is analysed, native food networks whose impact is more some commonly held (mis)conceptions can sustainable, equitable, healthy”. be reversed (Coley et al, 2009; Durham, King, There is not a clear definition of local and Roheim, 2009). food, its meaning depending on the specific Other criteria can be used to define the socio-economic and political context (Tovey, “localness” of a product (Feagan, 2007; 2009). In practice, there is a variety of defi- Belletti, Casabianca e Marescotti, 2013). nitions; the most common and easily under- Indeed, a widespread meaning of local food standable one is strictly linked to the “food assumes a different interpretation of the local- miles” concept (Pretty et al., 2005; Hogan and ity, not so much related to how food reaches Thorpe, 2009). According to this definition, marketplace and consumers, looking instead

8 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

to the link between the product and its place which alone should have the right to use it to of production in terms of specificity of local attain economic, social and cultural benefits. resources used in the production process, The origin product can also represent a cata- history of the product and the production lyst of local community action, one that can and consumption tradition, and its collective reinforce promotion initiatives at the local dimension (Belletti and Marescotti, 2011). level (Bérard, Marchenay and Casabianca, These products are commonly referred to as 2005). “origin products” or “typical products”. The link between the production system The specificity of local resources affects the and the territory of production is in some cases quality characteristics of the origin product, encapsulated in legally protected geographi- too, and it may come from the physical envi- cal indications (Tregear et al, 2007), as well as ronment where it is produced (winds, soils, temperature and humidity, genetic resources, etc.), as well as the human resources and know- how (breeding, handling and processing prac- tices, cultivation techniques, etc.). Know-how and practices are usually highly specific, and transmitted through time from one gener- ation to the next, adapted to the evolution of the environment and society on the basis of contextual local knowledge and scientific progress. Moreover, there is also a consump- tion tradition specific to the place of origin, namely knowledge of how to eat the product and when, how to prepare and cook it, how to taste it, and how to evaluate its quality. History and cultural traditions are closely connected to the third specificity, the collective dimen- Promotion of honey awarded with medals at the sion (Berriet, 1995; Barjolle, Chappuis and Moroccan Contest of typical food products, Morocco Sylvander, 1998). Actually, the link of origin products with the territorial area has been frequently being expressed in less formalized created, and transmitted over time within a ways, often related to specific marketing chan- community of producers and consumers in nels (Kirwan, 2006) and embedded in rela- such a way that the product becomes part of tional/cognitive/institutional relations with the common local patrimony, something that the community concerned. This geographi- cannot be individually owned. The process of cal name is used as the main communication knowledge acquisition (often contextual and leverage to market the product to consumers, non-codified), accumulation and sedimenta- owing to the reputation acquired over time tion makes an origin product the expression on the basis of repeated purchases and the of a community of producers and often of the maintenance of the promise of quality. overall local community organisation, values, In the end, the concept of local food is quite traditions and habits. That is why origin prod- flexible, as we can observe a variety of defini- ucts have a patrimonial dimension (Bérard tions along a “continuum” ranging from the and Marchenay, 1995): the product character- simple criterion of distance from the place of istics, the way of producing, storing, market- production to the place of consumption, up to ing, consuming and appreciating an origin more articulated ones which includes other product, are all part of the patrimony and economic, social, cultural, environmental historical memory of the local community, criteria.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 9 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

2. The variety of short food supply-chains initiatives

In the real world, there is a huge variety of by farmers (both individually and collec- SFSC initiatives, which take on very different tively), then analysing consumers-driven characteristics and operating methods, albeit initiatives, and finally introducing other SFSC inspired by the same principle of geographical, initiatives where the link between farmers economic, and social reconnection between and final consumers is mediated by an inter- production and consumption. mediary step. Before quickly introducing the most rele- vant ones for the purpose of this work, it is 2.1. On-farm selling important to note that the lack of a clear defi- Farm-gate sales is a traditional form of nition of the concept of SFSC, together with marketing that producers have always the ambiguity and different interpretations been adopting, by just selling their produce of the concept of local food and localness, directly on farm or close to the place where contributes to make the picture even more the farm is located, or on roadside stalls. complex. Farm-gate sales are characterized by the fact In the following paragraphs an overview of that consumers are moving to the place of the most important SFSCs initiatives will be production, devoting time and resources to provided, starting from initiatives promoted this activity.

FARM SHOP (COSTA RICA)

Despite the fact that the coffee production Looking for that high quality standard, Don process is composed of a plurality of steps Cayito started processing its coffee on-farm in and typically highly globalized, interesting a micro coffee-mill since 2009. There they can practices of SFSCs are spreading all over the give an appropriate follow-up to the work at world, including on-farm selling. the farm, dividing the harvest in lots and micro Don Cayito is a family-owned coffee farm lots according to coffee variety and the process in Santa María de Dota, Costa Rica, a well applied (washed, honey or natural). Shortening known region for quality coffee, due not only the value chain was a need, in order to better to the characteristics both soil and climate communicate the special quality of coffee to of the region, but also to local coffee farm- both final and professional consumers, and ers know-how and production experience. increase the value added. Don Cayito’s coffee is Coffee plantations are located between 1650 sold not only abroad (mainly USA and Japan), – 2100 m of elevation in a wonderful land- but also in Costa Rica, through an online shop scape of steep slopes. and an on-farm store, where it is possible to taste and buy the Don Cayito specialty coffees.

BOX 1 Source: https://cafedoncayito.com/ https://cafedoncayito.com/ Source:

10 THE VARIETY OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS INITIATIVES LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

PICK-YOUR-OWN (CROATIA AND BRAZIL)

Croatia produces table grapes (in 4,8 hectares since Sven is a fruit grower from the small village 2013). In both cases, consumers use a basket of Brežane Lekeničke, located in Sisak- and scissors (in the case of grapes) to pick the Moslavina County wants to encourage people selected fruits, after being instructed on how to come and pick home-grown apples them- to harvest the fruit straight from the foot, selves, as well as use such an approach to without damaging the rest of the plant, while potentially open up a new sales channel. The being observed by the farm staff. The price farmer, with all types of apples growing in his to be paid occurs according to the amount large orchard, has invited the public to come harvested, and the visitor can choose to and pick them themselves, as many as they consume on place or take it away, using boxes want, for a price of between just one and three provided by the producers. In the case of the kuna depending on the type of apple taken. grape farm, the strategy has been to invest in This initiative has been taken both to front a new grape varieties to extend the period when workforce problem – the farm was not able to the property is open to the public. Among the find people for harvesting – and too low prices main advantages observed, proximity and offered by local wholesalers. loyalty of consumers, the reduction of distri- bution costs, and reduction of product losses, Brazil lower competition and better profitability Two small properties in the state of São Paulo for the producer. Farmers needed to adapt chose to replace conventional distribution the structures to better accommodate the with distribution only by the pick-your-own. visitor, in terms of organization, cleanliness, The first farm produces strawberry (in 1,5 restroom installation, availability of covered hectare since 2016) and the second farm areas for sun protection.

BOX 2 Lima, Pigatto, and Machado (2018), Machado and Pigatto, Lima, Source: https://www.total-croatia-news.com/lifestyle/30930-want-some-fruit-pick-it-yourself-one-kuna-per-kilogram Source:

Nowadays, direct selling has undergone many cut-your-own or choose-your-own, and is a evolutions thanks to the connection with the frequent direct marketing channel choice new needs of consumers, in terms of conven- for farms growing berries, vegetables and ience, quality of the product and personal fruits in general. PYO formally emerged satisfaction, thus generating opportunities in the United States when prices for some for creating value added. fruit and vegetable crops hit low levels in Customers would come to the farm to buy the 1930-40s, prompting some producers to seasonal produce, special products, or even, allow customers to come to the fields to pick in some cases, to collect themselves directly their own product for purchase. An increase on the field. The degree of organization and in “rural recreation,” as people drove to the complexity of on-farm selling varies a lot, countryside from the cities for leisure, also from unstructured and very seasonal selling, influenced the popularity of PYO marketing up to the creation of shops inside the farm, (Leffew and Ernst, 2014). Besides the satisfac- also depending on the availability of processed tion of collecting their own fruits and vege- products such as wine, cheese, coffee. tables and enjoying some time surrounded One emerging typology of on-farm sell- by nature, PYO also allows customers to save ing is known as pick-your-own (PYO), u-pick, up to 40-50% compared to the prices of shops

THE VARIETY OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS INITIATIVES THE VARIETY OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS INITIATIVES 11 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

AGRITOURISM (ALBANIA AND BRAZIL)

Albania Brazil Agritourism is a relatively new phenomenon The “Caminho Caipira/Caipira Way” is a rural in Albania. One of the first Albanian holiday agrotourism, located in the municipality of farms is “Mrizi I Zanave”, located near the Borborema (state of São Paulo/Brazil). It village of Fishtë. in the district of Lezha, about offers lodging, dinner, breakfast, goat- milk 80 km north of the capital Tirana. The owner, ing, cultural events, hiking, space for camp- after some working experiences abroad, ing, lodging, rustic lunch, colonial breakfast, opened this agritourism in a family farm, cultural events, and cows-milking. Processed focusing on the use of local ingredients and products are based on available farm ingredi- the rediscovery and reinterpretation of tradi- ents, grown without pesticides, prioritizing tional local recipes. Also thanks to the connec- respect for the environment, conservation of tion to Slow Food movement, Mrizi I Zanave native forests and river springs. The commer- had great success with both local customers cialization of the production takes place and tourists. This allowed to develop farm through meals served at the lodge and camp- production, and to activate a demand for prod- ing, through the direct sale of jams, tamarind ucts from numerous smallholders nearby. paste and liqueurs, breads, pasta and cheese in Mrizi I Zanave not only uses these products the store located in the farm, and also through for preparing meals, but also direct sell them deliveries, once a week, at home in neighbour- to hosts. ing cities.

BOX 3 Source: http://www.mrizizanave.al/ Fernandes et al. (2016) et Fernandes http://www.mrizizanave.al/ Source:

and supermarkets. Customers adopting this method also decide the quantity, variety and quality of the products and are sure they bring home healthy, seasonal food. In addition, PYO is relevant for consumers’ education, as they can learn on the field about the various stages of agricultural production and seasonality, which most people are nowadays unfamiliar with. Besides selling fresh agricultural products, additional direct marketing opportunities for producers might come from services linked to farm products, such as tasting and meals provi- sion. One of the most widespread example is agritourism, which entails, in its strict sense, the introduction of hospitality and catering activities on the farm, besides the normal agri- cultural production. In a broader meaning, agritourism allows to provide for a vast range of services, from camping to food and wine trails, Argan oil consortium Vitargan promoting its products in to labour experiences at the farm. a mall in Casablanca, Morocco

12 THE VARIETY OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS INITIATIVES LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

FARMERS’ MARKET (LATVIA)

Straupe Farmers’ Market is located in diversity of supply at the market. Artisanal Straupe, a rural village (1500 inhabitants) in non-food products have to be related to local central Latvia, about 60 kilometres far from food or traditions. the capital. It is an open-air farmers’ market, The market includes about 70 regular organized twice per month. The market vendors. Most vendors come from the local was launched by a group of local activists territory /region (up to 30 km), but also that decided to provide an alternative space mobile producers coming from faraway (more for both local producers and consumers. than 100 km) and practicing various modes of The activists involved farmers and the local direct selling are allowed. municipality, with the main aim of better The SFSC was initiated by local people as a valuing local producers and local food. Most reaction to the specific situation of local food sellers are local and regional small-medium production, distribution and consumption. farmers and artisanal producers. In addition, The main aim of the initiators was to reduce local dwellers are allowed to sell their own food miles, intended as geographical but also surplus and picked wild or natural products social distance between local producers and (mushrooms, berries, flowers). Some local consumers. Specific rules for the market have or regional food companies take also part in been developed by its initiators/organizers the market. Consumers are local and regional (abiding by national laws and regulations) people, as well as passers-by, as the market is and they take the relevant decisions. Local located on a major road. origin is stressed in the market’s regulations

Source: http://www.mrizizanave.al/ Fernandes et al. (2016) et Fernandes http://www.mrizizanave.al/ Source: Straupe market regulations, developed at and compliance with quality standard is local level by the market organisers, state that ensured, as producers-vendors have to fulfil agricultural and artisanal products allowed food production and distribution regulations are those ‘honestly’ produced and processed in order to be accepted in the market. Formal by farmers themselves and which are closely rules are therefore in place besides relations linked to local food or local traditions. Space of trust. However, products are not all 100% limitations at the market result in prefer- local (presumably, there are not yet enough ence being given to products of local origin, local producers to sell their produce on the organic, natural, traditional, environmen- market), but all the products are at least tradi- tally friendly, and which contribute to the tional Latvian or artisanal products.

BOX 4 Source: Šumane (2014) and https://www.entergauja.com/en/things-to-do/enter-culture/straupe-farmers-market (2014) and Šumane Source:

2.2. Farmers’ markets Farmers’ markets have grown in recent years Farmers markets are generally considered as out of the need and will of small producers recurrent markets at fixed locations where to find alternative market outlets for their farm products are sold directly by farmers products and give visibility to local agricul- themselves (Brown, 2001) with a common ture. The most of these markets are held organization and under a same image and/or once or twice a week or also once a month, some shared rules. This is what differentiates while is quite infrequent to have a daily farmers’ market from the simple, spontaneous frequency. forms of selling in a route or place, common in There is a certain degree of variability many cities. among farmers’ markets, according to the

THE VARIETY OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS INITIATIVES THE VARIETY OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS INITIATIVES 13 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

different actors, interests and purposes. an instrument for rural development processes Markets promoted by producers’ organiza- or regional marketing strategies, too. tions, for instance, are meant as a point of Decisions on access for participants and exchange in both commercial terms and in rules are up to the market promoters – either terms of values, culture, awareness raising, informally or formally organized within a and active citizenship. Small farms have committee – depending on both the market normally a central role, such as individual characterization and the space available. and family-run ones: in such case, support- More often, when space is reduced, ensuring ing small farming is among the leading prin- continuity of supply and of the relationship ciples and aims, as well as the small size a between producers and consumers explains participation requisite. the tendency to keep the same producers to Besides, there are farmers’ markets take part in the market. promoted by public institutions that aim at In some cases farmers’ markets are iden- enhancing local production and local gastro- tified as organic, biodynamic, conventional nomic traditions and culture. When public (or a mix of the previous) and therefore actors are involved, farmers’ markets represent producers who mean to adhere have to fulfill

FARMERS’ MARKETS NETWORKS

Earth Markets are farmers’ markets that have impact is minimised: e.g. with waste reduc- been established according to guidelines that tion, biodegradable consumables, recycling, follow the Slow Food philosophy. All around and energy-saving measures. Producers must the world, 68 Earth Markets are run by local demonstrate their suitability before they are communities, providing a space where produc- permitted to sell at Earth Markets. The focus is ers and consumers meet and healthy, quality on small-scale farmers and artisan producers, food is available at fair prices and produced providing them with an important opportunity with environmentally sustainable methods. in which they do not have to compete with large In addition, Earth Markets allow the preserva- distribution chains. Small-scale production is tion of food culture of the local community and also favoured as it often produces high-qual- contribute to defending biodiversity. ity results. Producers are asked to charge a fair An Earth Market is created when an inter- price for their work and pledge fair treatment ested community – producers, local author- of their employees. ities, citizens, Slow Food convivia and other A key requirement is for vendors to attend interested parties such as restaurateurs – come the market themselves and to only sell prod- together to establish a new place for consum- ucts that they have produced themselves. As ers and food producers to meet. A manage- producers are meeting directly with custom- ment committee, with representation from all ers, they must be open and willing to talk these groups, is responsible for selecting the about their product and its qualities, the work producers, promoting the market, and ensur- involved, and how the prices are justified. ing the guidelines are followed. They are also Producers must come from the local region, required to manage the logistical aspects of the within a radius specified for each Earth Market market, and to ensure that the environmental to suit the context.

BOX 5 Source: https://www.fondazioneslowfood.com/en/what-we-do/earth-markets/what-is-an-earth-market/ Source:

14 THE VARIETY OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS INITIATIVES LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

specific requirements concerning the produc- Price management is a delicate matter in tion method used for agricultural practices. SFSCs, as principles of fairness, transpar- Sometimes they are specialized in some prod- ency, solidarity are normally asked to be ucts category (e.g. fruits and vegetables). fulfilled. Informal assessments by the market However, it is more frequent to have a differ- committee and producers’ consultations entiated offer as to be more attractive for regulate in most cases the price definition. consumers. Moreover, managing rules for market The organization and development of a access, and standards of production and sale farmers’ market implies a number of resources to be complied, often pertains to non-produc- and costs. Time is needed for organizing and ers/commercial operators, which might be managing the market, e.g. to find, select and allowed to participate when promoters aim organize producers, to draw-up an organiza- at expanding the market size and the range tion able to take main decisions, make control of products supplied, but access is commonly on the quality and, sometimes, prices. The use restricted to local products, to avoid the risk of public spaces often requires paying a fee to of compromising the meaning and image of the local municipality, also for the provision the market. of some services such as energy and cleaning. Farmers markets are also identified Some basic equipment are needed, such as depending on the place where they are held sales banquets, and they can be provided by and the targeted customers. Most are local, the organizers. Some promotion and commu- usual customers, even if, depending on the nication could be necessary in order to inform place and season, farmers’ markets are also consumers. visited by tourists, for instance, when they Source: https://www.fondazioneslowfood.com/en/what-we-do/earth-markets/what-is-an-earth-market/ Source: Farmers market in Pisa, Italy

THE VARIETY OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS INITIATIVES THE VARIETY OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS INITIATIVES 15 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

LOCAL FOOD SHOP (HUNGARY AND FRANCE) BOX SCHEME (SOUTH AFRICA)

Hungary France The Szekszard SFSC was developed by a Brin d’Herbe is a group of 20 farmers, which non-profit organisation (Eco-Sensus Ltd) for 20 years have been selling “cottage” and including food producers and experts in “organic” products in two stores on the the Szekszard wine region. It applies to any outskirts of Rennes. Main products are meat local individual farm or enterprise in the (60 % of the turnover), fruit & vegetables, area. Main aim of the scheme was to connect bakery, dairy products, cheeses, eggs, honey, local producers and consumers by means of cider. Their market can be quantified as about a point of sale and community-based enter- 1000 consumers per week. The shop opens prise for local food. In addition, the scheme three days a week. The turnover is 1,5 million aimed at gathering and showcasing the vari- Euro per year. ety of local agricultural products of this To run the shop, farmers are organized into region, which is already well known for its a specific form of association that allows them wine, promoting products such as salami, to keep their identity and operational auton- flours, honey, paprika, sunflower oil, jams omy vis a vis consumers, and at the same time and cheese. to define a common space of coordination. This The scheme entails a quality assurance aspect is also a regulatory requirement, as in mechanism and a brand to promote local this way the shop can be classified as “direct food. Requirements and quality criteria are selling” activity. continuously fine-tuned through participa- They hire people to work at the shop, but tory methods, and include the identifica- at least one of the farmers guarantees his/ tion of local producers, as well as social and her presence in the shop as well (to improve ecological quality of production and packag- exchanges with the consumers about the prod- ing. Local farmers are encouraged to qualify ucts). They have a labour time bank (linked for the food label and are given visibility on to the turnover of each producer). The more a dedicated website. produce a farmer sells in the shop, the more The scheme has also launched an initia- time he/she should invest into the shop. Every tive of regional branding in the communi- kind of work (communication, repairs, etc.) is ty-based local food shop, and applies to all valued the same. In general, each of them dedi- basic and seasonal products of the region. cates one day a week to the shop. Pictures of all The Szekszard local food label is a registered associated farmers are displayed in the shops. trademark for all various food types availa- Prices are set by each farmers, although ble in the region. This allows local farmers there is internal communication about price to carry out direct sales of their produce and policies. However, there is not much overlap provides a secure market outlet. among farmers with regard to products sold, so in shop competition is avoided.

BOX 6 Source: taken from Galli and Brunori (2013), and https://www.brindherbe35.fr/ (2013), and Brunori and Galli from taken Source:

are carried out on an ongoing basis and in local consumers are more oriented to local the city centre. Often, at these markets a food provision and daily consumption. wide range of origin foods are available for In some cases, farmers’ markets are part tourists, whereas farmers’ markets targeting of a wider network. This implies to comply

16 THE VARIETY OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS INITIATIVES LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

BOX SCHEME (SOUTH AFRICA)

Abalimi is a social enterprise, working to quality control, harvesting, cleaning and empower disadvantaged people in urban bunching of vegetables themselves. areas through ecological urban agriculture. Harvest of Hope picks up the vegetables Producers are mainly women, engaged in from the gardens once a week and delivers vegetable gardening in home and community them to the packing shed, close to Abalimi gardens. office and provided with all the equipment A part of the farmers has been involved in needed to process vegetables. Here vege- the Harvest of Hope, a box-scheme market- tables are weighed and processed (washed, ing initiative. Abalimi provides inputs such cut and packaged or bundled) by the staff, as seeds, seedlings, compost, fertiliser and which includes Abalimi field staff and several equipment, paid by farmers through a share producers on a rotational basis, in order to deducted from their monthly payment. learn how to run the whole process, from the Although the price that producers get for field to marketing. selling to Harvest of Hope is (often) lower Abalimi prepares different types of boxes, than selling directly to the local community, delivered to the collection points, most of Harvest of Hope provides, besides a regu- which are primary schools in the suburbs of lar market, a secure and upfront source of Cape Town, but also some institutions and income. The vegetables price is set according a retail outlet. Schools seem to be the most to a comparative analysis of prices at differ- appreciated distribution places, as custom- ent supermarkets and wholesalers. ers combine collecting their children with Producers sign simple contracts to grow picking up the food box. Consumers are specified crops in a designated size plot for informed by weekly emails and can partic- pre-planned yields at pre-determined prices, ipate as a volunteer or join a weekly tour to to be harvested on targeted dates. They do the gardens and the pack shed.

BOX 7 Source: Hoekstra and Small (2010) Small and Hoekstra Source:

with a standard (in terms of common format, operations, an additional, alternative distri- internal rules, image, organization) and can bution channel involving a direct relation- allow for easier and costless promotion and ship between producers and consumers. A communication to consumers, thus incentiv- box-scheme entails a subscription by custom- izing farmers participation. ers (or groups of customers) to the regu- lar (weekly, biweekly, monthly) delivery of 2.3. Farmers’ shops, box schemes a specific quantity of fresh vegetables and On-farm selling can evolve also going a bit fruits, the offering varying according to the more “off-farm”, which is incorporating some season and availability at the farm. Delivery

Source: taken from Galli and Brunori (2013), and https://www.brindherbe35.fr/ (2013), and Brunori and Galli from taken Source: services of proximity to consumers. This is the occurs either at the farm or to a collection case of opening shops outside the farm or acti- point or at the doorstep, depending on the vating home delivery services. case. Many box-schemes offer a range of Farmers’ shops are retail outlets directly box sizes and allow the customers to order managed by one or more associated farms, additional products, such as jams, meat or selling produce directly from the farm. dairy products, along with the box of vegeta- Producers might also engage in box-scheme bles. Commonly, food delivered through box

THE VARIETY OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS INITIATIVES THE VARIETY OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS INITIATIVES 17 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

schemes is seasonal, locally grown and organic More specifically, an SPG is an informal or sustainably-produced. Production might group, including between 30 and 80 house- also assume ethically relevant connotations, holds (Fonte, 2013), although there is a great as with the involvement of disadvantaged level of variability both in terms of numbers workers or having the scheme being carried involved, internal arrangements and develop- out in socially depressed contexts. ment. Typically, when the number of members increases, a new group is organized, often 2.4. Consumers-driven initiatives linked to the previous, in order to maintain a limited size that allows for the members to Solidarity Purchasing Groups and consum- develop personal relationships between them. ers’ managed shops The personal experience of the initiators is Solidarity-based Purchase Groups (or essential for the development of the initiative: Solidarity Purchasing Groups - SPG), are many first groups were formed by spontaneous groups of consumers who purchase collectively initiative of individual promoters, generally through a direct relationship with producers, consumers but also small producers, driven according to shared ethical principles (Brunori by strong ideological motivations and often et al., 2011). belonging to social movements’ organizations.

FOOD COOP (ITALY)

The Park Slope Food Coop is a consum- what one buys, it is possible to make good ers-owned and operated food store, providing savings: according to a recent price compari- an alternative to commercial profit-oriented son survey, Coop members save 20-40% off of business. Membership is open to all, and their weekly grocery bill. All members must, in only members may shop at the Food Coop. addition, pay a non-refundable $25.00 fee and Members contribute with their own labour: contribute a $100.00 investment to the Coop, this enables teamwork and trust but also which will be refunded upon request in case of allows to keep prices as low as possible within membership suspension. For members who the context of shared values and principles. receive certain kinds of income-based assis- Members, in addition, share responsibilities tance, the joining fee is $5 and the refundable and benefits equally. member investment is $10. The Coop accepts As one of the Coop’s goals is to provide food Food Stamps coupons. to the member-owners that is both low priced The Coop carries a wide variety of prod- and high quality, and low prices come primar- ucts (more than 5000 items) to serve a diverse ily from saving money in the area of payroll population with a variety of needs. Among its expense, every member of the Coop must principles, the Food Coop supports non-toxic, work at the Coop. The work requirement is 2 sustainable agriculture and aims at avoiding hours and 45 minutes once every four weeks. products that depend on labour and environ- At this rate, every member works 13 times per mental exploitation. Therefore, the offer at calendar year. In this way, Food Coop members Park Slope is diverse but with an emphasis on do about 75% of the work, thereby keeping organic, minimally processed and healthful the payroll, and prices, low. Depending on foods.

BOX 8 Source: https://www.foodcoop.com/ Source:

18 THE VARIETY OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS INITIATIVES LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

Most members are middle class, well-edu- also hobby and part-time farmers; cated people aged between 35 and 50. Main -- distance of the farm, which should pref- motivations to engage with an SPG include erably be located nearby or within the the need and will to engage with responsible same region; consumption practices; awareness about ethi- -- direct relationship and knowledge, so cal, social and environmental issues related to that the future relationship is based on the agri-food system; support to small farmers reputation and consolidated trust; and small-scale agriculture; the purchase and -- the farmers’ attitude to transparency consumption of healthy, often organic, prod- and knowledge sharing, and to provid- ucts at affordable prices. ing clear information on the production Normally, producers are selected by the process and products characteristics; members according to shared principles, -- environmental performance, which including: should entail production methods with low environmental impact – organic -- the farm’s size: these are generally small or biodynamic farming – either with or or very small producers, in most cases without formal certification, when the professional/direct farmers, sometimes relationship is strongly based on trust;

COMMUNITY SUPPORTED AGRICULTURE (USA)

The basic idea of CSA farming at Paululs but in summer time the shares are “fuller.” Mt.Airy Orchards (USA) is a cooperative For example, the very first share might relationship between the farmer and his have asparagus, spinach, lettuce, red beets, customers. Based on an annual commitment spring onions and apple cider donuts, and a to each other, community members provide a share a couple weeks later might have more pre-season payment to purchase a “share” of and different items (strawberries, rhubarb, the season’s harvest. The member receives a asparagus, bok choy, spinach, and red beets). weekly box of a wide variety of fresh, in-sea- Then in late summer it might be peaches, son fruits and vegetables as well as the possi- apples, sweet corn, tomatoes, cucumbers and bility of other farm product treats such as our cabbage. own baked goods throughout the growing Being a CSA member is a season-long season. commitment to the farm, and in return the A share is a weekly box of local, fresh, farmer provides the customers with the best sustainable produce that is picked up or produce and family farm experience. In addi- delivered each week for 18 weeks (week of tion, the customer will receive 10% off all May 26th through September 22nd). Shares u-pick (strawberries, blueberries, blackber- include a mix of fresh fruits and vegetables ries, black raspberries, apples, and pump- and from time to time other treats (for exam- kins) as well as 2 free Corn Maze/PlayLand ple homemade cider donuts, homemade jam, tickets per share purchased! The customer new recipes to try), reflecting the growing also receive an email each Monday letting season. The first 2-3 weeks are light because him know what will be included in that week’s the growing season in PA is just starting share.

BOX 9 Source: https://www.foodcoop.com/ Source: https://paulusmtairyorchards.com/fruitsveggies/csa-program/ from taken Source:

THE VARIETY OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS INITIATIVES THE VARIETY OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS INITIATIVES 19 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

-- social and ethics principles, concerning for instance labour conditions at the farm; -- price and affordability of the products: even if convenience is not the main aim of an SPG, a fair price for both produc- ers and customers is desirable.

There is variability in the number of produc- ers involved in an SPG, in turn depending on the SPG size: normally, each producer manages one product/one set of products, but a larger SPG might need more producers supplying the same kind of product. These are generally vegetables and fruits, available according to the season, but also bread, flour, cheeses, jams and sauces, olive oil, wine, honey, meat products. In most cases, an SPG has an autonomous, Farmers market in New York, USA flexible and informal management of activ- ity. They often rely on previously existing several producers, whereby the risks, organizations – local charities, cooperatives, responsibilities and rewards of farming are other kind of civil society organizations – shared, through a long-term, binding agree- operating in the social, fair trade, environ- ment (European CSA Declaration4). This mental sector. It is quite rare that to find an model of SFSC varies according the coun- SPG formally established with a specific legal tries, and evolved quite a lot along time. status. CSA originated in Japan in 1965 when Consumers’ managed shops can be seen as a group of women worried by the food an evolution of the SPG model. In this case, imports increase and consequent reduc- consumers directly set up and manage a shop, tion of local agriculture joined to buy fresh normally organized in the form of co-oper- milk directly from a group of local farms. ative, adopting the same principles of SPGs The “teikei”, that is the Japanese for “put as regards producers’ selection, and product the farmer’s face on food” is the name quality criteria to be complied when provid- given to such agreement, largely associated ing the shop. Besides the aim of achieving with small-scale, local, organic farming, economic benefits (lower price of food) and volunteer-based, non-profit partner- mainly thanks to the voluntary work of associ- ships between producers and consumers ated consumers, these initiatives are normally (Lamine, 2005). inspired by environmental, ethic, and social Within a CSA, members (or share-hold- criteria. ers) anticipate the costs for cultivation operations and for the farmer’s salary and Community Supported Agriculture get in return a part of the farm produce when Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) the season comes, besides a sense of satis- is a direct partnership based on the human faction for taking part in the agricultural relationship between people and one or work. Sharing the farmers’ risks implies for

4 European CSA Declaration. No date. http://www.communitysupportedagriculture.ie/downloadable/European-CSA-Declaration.pdf

20 THE VARIETY OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS INITIATIVES LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

the members also sharing the risk of a poor of both quality of food and positive external or low-quality harvest due to weather condi- effects generated on the environment and local tions or pests. For farmers, selling directly economy. The significant size of public food to members-consumers allows to get a fair procurement can be used to drive goals related price, as well as to save money which would to improvements of smallholder livelihoods, otherwise devote to marketing activities. food security and nutrition. Public procurement is not per se a form of 2.5. Public (collective) procurement SFSC. However, it offers interesting oppor- Public procurement refers to the purchase tunities for developing and supporting local of goods and services by public institutions agricultural products. Public authorities can (at different levels, from the State up to use different approaches to provide opportuni- local municipalities) and state-owned enter- ties for the introduction of locally or regionally prises. For food, it mainly refers to purchase sourced produce in their food procurement, agricultural and food products by schools, depending on structural specificities linked to hospitals, and in general collective residences national laws, maturity of implementation of such as hospices, prisons, or barracks. Food specific initiatives such as green and sustaina- public procurement, in particular in coun- ble public procurement, and general manage- tries where services provided by the State ment and organization of public canteens. are important, represents an opportunity in The way the purchase of food in public order to ensure high quality of service deliv- procurement is organized varies a lot, and ery and safeguard the public interest in terms strongly affects the real opportunities for

MUNICIPAL CATERING OF KIURUVESI (FINLAND)

The rural town of Kiuruvesi started prior- on the careful planning of menus. Such itising the use of local and organic food planning allows for the inclusion of local (LOF) in the late nineties. At the core of and organic produce in school food without the LOF concepts are values such as “local compromising the taste and the nutritional entrepreneurship, local and organic produc- characteristics of meals. Furthermore, it tion, quality, traceability, environmen- allows for containing costs. tally friendly production, animal welfare The tendering procedure is centred on and continuous development”. A pilot the implementation of a pre-tendering project implementing the LOF concept in dialogue between potential suppliers and school catering started in the year 2000. the municipal catering service. The dialogue Municipality has moved the focus from is aimed at matching kitchens’ needs with decentralised and price-based selection the capacity supply of interested producers of suppliers to competitive bidding where and processors. It allows kitchens’ staff to other criteria than price are used in order to explain what they need and to get feedback select the supplier. from suppliers on the characteristics of The tendering procedure is generally their products. This interaction often leads based on the careful selection of the food to the co-development of products and of items to be requested, which is in turn based recipes based on local foodstuff.

BOX 10 Source: European Committe of the Regions (2018) the Regions of Committe European Source:

THE VARIETY OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS INITIATIVES THE VARIETY OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS INITIATIVES 21 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

developing SFSCs. In fact, food purchase may 2.6. Hotels, Restaurants, Catering be undertaken by a central unit, or by indi- (HoReCa) vidual schools, or even by individual kitchens SFSCs are of great interest for “professional within a centrally finalized framework agree- consumers”, too. Indeed, local retailers, ment with a wholesaler (European Committee restaurants, hotels, markets, street food of the Region, 2018). The size of the purchase vendors, may source directly from local farm- lots (which must be homogeneous and regu- ers and sell to local consumers. lar in deliveries), and the level of incorpo- Local provisioning is often preferred by rated services of processing and packaging professional consumers in case of fresh prod- (for example, purchase of whole fresh fruit or ucts, and also for logistical aspects (reduc- already prepared and packaged fruit salad), tion of transport costs, day-by-day delivery, such as the need for some formal certification less need of storage), and in case when direct that guarantees specific quality attributes relations with producers allows for a better of the local food provided (such as organic) control of the quality of raw material and strongly affect the possibility for single farm- production process used, and the establish- ers to directly satisfy the demand that comes ment of relations of trust. from the public administration. Moreover, the Not always the information about the local variety of food asked by purchasers strongly provenience of food is actually transmitted affects the possibility to introduce local food to final consumers. Anyway, given the rising directly provided by farmers. For a public attention paid by consumers to provenience purchaser it is normally simpler and less costly and authenticity of food, communication to buy food from big trade providers. about the “localness” of food is more and Public food procurement can provide an more frequent and used, as it may represent accessible market channel to smallholder a factor of attraction, distinction, and there- farmers by reducing risks and uncertainties fore commercial success. involved in market participation. However, Local retailers may benefit from having local farmers, and in particular smaller ones, local food (especially origin food) in their can encounter many difficulties in comply- assortments, especially when mainly address- ing with formal and substantial requirements ing to external consumers (tourists), given of public procurement. Often some degree the importance of food souvenirs in the tour- of coordination is needed in order to over- istic market. Even local consumers may be come such problems, for example developing attracted by local food in shops, both for daily producers’ associations or cooperatives. consumption and for special occasions. Generally speaking, introducing sustain- Restaurants may promote local food to able local food into public canteens is a quite attract customers, emphasizing both the local complex process. That is why it is political provenience and typicalness of food prepared, commitment that should drive this kind of together with local recipes and tools. initiatives. Changes needed are both cultural (e.g. eating habits as healthier food may have 2.7. The many dimensions of SFSCs a different taste) and structural (e.g. crea- initiatives tion of small-scale pre-processing facilities), The analysis of the most widespread SFSCs and therefore it may take time to be imple- initiatives showed the high degree of diversity mented. The sequential introduction of qual- between each other, although all united by the ity requirements in procurements seems to aim to restoring a direct connection between be the most successful approach, as it gives producers and consumers and, to a more or caterers and suppliers, and supply chains in less extent, proposing an alternative way to general, time to adjust (European Committee industrialized and global food supply-chains. of the Region, 2018). As attempt to distinguish between the

22 THE VARIETY OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS INITIATIVES LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

multifaceted world of SFSCs initiatives, some Section 1.3) to gain competitive advantage in basic criteria can be useful. front of supermarket chains and globalized marketing channels. Number of intermediate steps According to the geographical distance The first criterion involves the two main between production and consumption, the keys used to define them (see Section 1.2): most common criterion used is related to the the number of intermediate steps and the number of miles between the place of produc- geographical distance between production tion and the place of purchase, although the and consumption. maximum number allowed defining the initi- According to the number of intermedi- ative as SFSC can vary according product ate steps, a distinction can be made between category, regional product availability in the Direct-to-consumers SFSCs and Intermediate region, socio-cultural context, and political SFSCs. Direct-to-consumers SFSCs include aims. supply-chains in which food producers, normally farmers, meet consumers directly, Individually-managed vs collectively- such as in on-farm sales, farmers’ markets, managed SFSCs farmers’ shops, and road stands. Intermediate SFSCs initiatives can be managed on an indi- SFSCs normally involve only one interme- vidual or collective basis (figure 2.1). diary who supply consumers directly, and Individual initiatives, managed by single can include small retailers, public procure- actors (a farmer, a consumer), normally ment, restaurants, hotels, specialized gour- do not require any pre-existing organiza- met shops, often dealing with local food (see tion or agreement with other producers, or

Cambodian Farm to consumer delivery

THE VARIETY OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS INITIATIVES THE VARIETY OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS INITIATIVES 23 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

between producers and consumers. Single between producers, or between consumers, actors are completely free to take decisions to or both, and therefore some forms of interac- exchange. A farmer can decide whether to sell tions between actors before the exchange is his products on-farm, or to deliver his prod- made. Therefore, in collective initiatives some ucts directly to the house of final consumers decision have to be taken jointly between a without having to submitting his decisions to community of producers and/or consumers other actors, as well as consumers may decide regarding the “rules of the game” and their to buy from a farmers’ market without asking management and control. Rules can cover a the permission to anybody. number of decision spheres, depending on the Collective initiatives do require some specific features of the initiative (Kebir and degree of (formal or informal) organization, Torre, 2013).

Fig. 2.1 – Map of SFSCs initiatives according to individual or collective logic

Single FARMERS Collective Single Roadside selling Farm shop Farmers` shops On farm selling

Farmers` markets

Box schemes ONSUMERS

C SPGs

Consumer- managed CSA shops ve llecti Co

24 THE VARIETY OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS INITIATIVES LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

Consumer-driven, farmer-driven, framework, intermediate actors of the food public-driven supply-chains (retailers, restaurants) have Another important criterion to distinguish been playing a relevant and growing role in SFSCs initiatives regards the category of fostering the shortening of the chains, in actors that activates and leads the initiative. order to meet new consumers’ expectation While traditional forms of SFSCs have been and attitudes. activated mainly by farmers on an individual An important role has been played by the or collective basis (on-farm selling, roadside public sector, both at national level, and at selling, farmers’ markets and farmers’ shops, more local level. Indeed, in many countries etc.), many SFSCs initiatives of the “new public institutions have promoted (with generation” have been rather prompted and special normative frameworks and/or finan- organized by groups of consumers, asking cial support) the birth of these initiatives, for fresher and safer products and will- often together with farmers’ associations ing to oppose to the dominant industrial- and more in general with representatives ized model of food production (Solidarity of actors’ categories, up to directly acti- purchasing groups, community-supported vate SFSCs initiatives, such as in the case of agriculture, box schemes, etc.). In this public procurement.

3. Display the potential of SFSCs

3.1. Short food supply-chains: a win- being related to the environmental and win game? social ones, too. The interest that both producers and SFSCs are therefore perceived as a win-win consumers place on the various forms of solution for both producers and consumers, SFSCs depends on their expectations about capable of benefiting both the extremes of the effects deriving from: the elimination, or the food supply-chain thanks to new config- containment, of commercial intermediation urations of the link between production and and of dominant positions within the supply consumption. At the same time, SFSCs are chains; the reduction of distance between also perceived as a tool capable of satisfying production and consumption; the opportu- the needs of society as a whole, which can nity of a better coordination between the enjoy a series of environmental and social two extremes of the supply chain. externalities. Both producers and consumers expect In the real world, things are not always so economic benefits, in terms of price advan- simple. Alongside the benefits, new costs and tages or more generally of better value for potential problems may arise, too. Objectives money. In fact, the consumer can normally pursued by SFSCs are often complex, and benefit from lower purchase prices (reduced sometimes in contrast with each other, or payments for long-distance transport and/ in any case do not appear fully compatible. or commercial intermediation), and the Moreover, actors are different, and each of farmer can obtain more profitable prices them pursues his own specific objectives, than those on the intermediate markets. sometimes not coinciding or also conflicting. The expected benefits are many, and - as Subsections 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 are devoted we have seen – go far the economic sphere, to analysing the potential benefits for

THE VARIETY OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS INITIATIVES DISPLAY THE POTENTIAL OF SFSCS 25 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

producers, consumers and society as a whole, production, processing, packaging, distribu- and identifying problems that can hinder tion and communication activities, attentive potential benefits. to complex quality attributes, often linked to sustainability issues. 3.2. Expected benefits for producers The following table summarizes the main Producers expect many benefits, connected potential benefits expected by producers, to different orders of motivations pushing and potential problems they may have to them to activate SFSCs (economic, social, front. Typologies and magnitude of bene- and environmental). Achieving these bene- fits and problems obviously depend on the fits asks for a more or less deep change in specific typology of SFSC initiative, and on entrepreneurial attitude, organization, and characteristics of both the farmer and the investments in the farm, and consequently is farm. However, identifying these categories hampered by a variety of factors. helps in building a well-grounded framework Farmers are strongly affected by shifting for both the farmer using SFSCs and the from long, industrialized marketing chan- policy maker interested in developing these nels to SFSCs. Farms are no longer focused kind of initiatives. only on obtaining scale economies on a few Farmers make use of SFSCs in many ways, number of processes, but more and more placing very different expectations on it. oriented towards a complexification of At one extreme, farmers see SFSCs as

Main producers’ expected benefits and potential problems

EXPECTED BENEFITS POTENTIAL PROBLEMS

-- Prices increase at farm gate -- New functions to be performed and -- Value added increase related increase in costs -- Easier market access, especially -- Increase in workforce for small producers -- Need for investments in equipment -- Better communication and for processing, transportation, and information to consumers selling -- Differentiation of marketing -- Need for new competencies and channels and higher resilience skills -- More stable commercial relations -- Need for diversification of production -- Opportunity to develop -- Opportunities restricted to areas cooperation with other farmers close to the city and/or touristic -- Opportunity to develop market cooperation with consumers -- Increasing competition in SFSC -- Allow for a strategic re-orientation market segment of the whole farm

26 DISPLAY THE POTENTIAL OF SFSCS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

one among other opportunities for market- ing their products, able to allow for gaining better product prices and value added, for an easier or more stable access to market, and for escaping from the higher bargaining power of processing firms and commercial interme- diaries. In this case, SFSC is perceived as just an alternative to other selling techniques, a tool allowing the farmer for an optimization of his marketing strategy. Economic expecta- tions are the driving ones, not only related to price increase but in general to the contribu- tion direct selling can give to different dimen- sions of profitability, for example in terms of risk diversification, access to new markets (geographical or typological), better use of familiar workforce, economic resilience. At the opposite extreme, SFSC can repre- sent one of the pivots of a new strategic orientation of the whole farm towards the multifunctional model of agriculture (Renting et al., 2009). In these cases, SFSC is part of a deep transformation of the farm, and its rele- vance goes far beyond just selling the product in a new way, being rather linked for example Farmers market in Munich, Germany to the activation of processing or on-farm hospitality activities or other services, the added through processing and prepara- adoption of new more environmental or tion of the product and services associated social-friendly production techniques. SFSC with the product by the farmer himself; often also allows re-establishing horizontal -- the possibility of activating a direct rela- relationships in the territory with other farm- tionship with consumers, thus being able ers, and other actors. to better acquire and transmit information Moreover, in a number of cases, the search to consumers, monitor the market, differ- for a multifunctional model represent for the entiate the product and obtain customer farmer an ethical need (more social responsi- loyalty; bility towards the environment and society) -- the possibility of socialisation and regain- or a way to improve his personal wellbeing. ing pride and satisfaction in his own work. In order to assess the effectiveness of SFSC, farmers have to take in account the multiple However, as seen in Section 2, these poten- benefits obtainable through participation tial benefits correspond to many potential in SFSC initiatives, not entirely reducible in problems, arising mainly from the need to monetary terms. They include: reorganize farming activity, logistic, and even reconsider the whole firm strategy, with -- the increased selling price of products, that a consequent need for new skills, resources, may result from a greater balance in bargain- and investments. ing power and also from solidarity mecha- Using SFSC for a farmer is normally more nisms of consumers toward producers; resource-consuming and costly than the -- the possibility to increasing the value industrialized and long one, due to the need

DISPLAY THE POTENTIAL OF SFSCS DISPLAY THE POTENTIAL OF SFSCS 27 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

to reincorporate and manage some activities that had been abandoned, or completely new. While in some cases this is a desired result by the famer, allowing for a better employment of family labour (in particular women and young people), in other cases this could be an obstacle to overcome. The extent and type of benefits and costs enjoyed by individual farms vary not only according to the characteristics of the SFSC initiative and the intensity of the relation- ship with consumers, but also according to the characteristics of the farm itself, espe- cially size and availability of labour. Small farmers have frequent difficulties in accessing SFSCs, due to inefficiencies of scale, diffi- culties in investment and lack of manpower required to manage the relationship with the consumer and/or activities of labour-inten- sive manufacturing and processing. Thus, “small is beautiful” does not always apply. Indeed, there is a notable development of numerous medium to large-sized farms that develop business projects focused on SFSCs Agricultural product promotion to hotels or even set up business for this sole purpose. and restaurants, Tanzania

3.3. Expected benefits for consumers solidarity towards farmers, thrown into crisis The rapid growth and diversification of SFSCs by the growing power of processing firms initiatives has brought to the increase of the and big retailers, and towards the environ- number of consumers who source food from ment, menaced by industrialized production short-chains, and a parallel diversification of processes. The ultimate goal of a number of the typology (revenue, age, education) and consumers has been that of trying to get the their motivations (Alkon, 2008; Kneafsey et steer of changes in agri-food system, turning al., 2008; McGarry, Spittler, and Ahern, 2005; from a passive role, where they were subject Weatherell, Tregear, and Allinson, 2003). Also to the decisions taken by other (big) players very varied is the relevance SFSC purchasing of the agri-food system, to a proactive one plays in their consumption model, and the (or at least a participative role), where they type of products they are searching for. could (co-)decide the rules of the game: how Consumers have been at the basis of and by whom food should be produced and SFSCs growth (Rossi, Favilli, and Brunori, distributed, how much the food should cost, 2013; Woods, 2008). Dissatisfaction and crit- and generally speaking what should be done to ics about industrialized agri-food system orient the agri-food system towards criteria of were the springs motivating the reaction of economic, social, and environmental sustain- some groups of consumers, who aimed at ability. searching for alternatives to the industrial- In some cases and countries, consumers ized and standardized food in order to get are older, higher educated and higher income, more fresh and nutritious food. At the same while in other cases young people and low time, consumers’ interest was prompted by income consumers may source from SFSCs,

28 DISPLAY THE POTENTIAL OF SFSCS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

Typologies of consumers addressing SFSC and their motivations

PRODUCT LOCAL FOOD ORIGIN PRODUCT CONSUMER

LOCAL daily consumption traditions and cultural identity CONSUMERS -- Routine shopping -- Keeping traditions and behavior culture -- Community development -- Special events and solidarity -- Edonistic consumption -- Rural development -- Community development -- Environment and solidarity -- Freshness/nutrition

EXTERNAL daily consumption touristic attraction CONSUMERS -- Freshness -- Local culture and habits -- Nutrition -- Knowledge and curiosity -- Souvenirs

thus depicting a fragmented scenario of moti- consumers may have when participating and vations, behaviours, and attitudes towards buying within SFSC initiatives. local food. Local consumers buy local food for daily A useful way to classify consumers’ motiva- consumption, mostly oriented to get fresh tions identifies two main dimensions. The first and nutritious products, reduce environ- dimension affects the degree of “localness” mental impact due to transport, as well as consumers search in SFSCs, which may vary to support their own community and rural from a product that is just produced “locally” development. When buying origin products, (short physical distance between production local consumers are more interested in having and consumption), to a product with special special identity products and keep their own territorial character (origin product) (see consumption traditions, often part of their Section 2). According to this distinction, local normal consumption but also for special food when identified as just produced close to events. the marketplace can be placed at one extreme, For many local consumers SFSF is just one while local food as origin food at the other. of the many ways to purchase the food they The second dimension is related to the type need. They resort to SFSCs occasionally, when of consumers, whether they are “local”/indig- they find an economic advantage or practicality enous or “non local”/tourists. The following of purchase, or sometimes just for special types table point out the variety of motivations of food (for example local origin products) and/

DISPLAY THE POTENTIAL OF SFSCS DISPLAY THE POTENTIAL OF SFSCS 29 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

Main consumers’ expected benefits and potential problems

EXPECTED BENEFITS POTENTIAL PROBLEMS

-- More affordable prices for food -- More time needed for food purchase -- Easier access to quality products: -- New function to be performed in pur- fresh, local, “authentic”, origin chase and in preparing food food -- New competences to be acquired in -- Buy products traceable from a food preparation known producer -- Increase in the “total cost” of food -- Reconnect food to the farming and (that includes costs related to the processing process whole buying and consumption pro- -- Easier access to healthier food cess) options -- Scarce information on where to buy -- Pursue of social and ethical objec- -- More accessible for affluent and tives well-educated people -- Support local economy

or occasions. At the opposite end, for a number benefits they can expect are quite differen- of consumers shifting to SFSC is connected tiated and related not only to the economic to a profound change in both purchasing and sphere, in terms of lower prices or of a better consumption patterns, with greater attention price/quality ratio. The following table to the nutritional properties and provenience summarizes in the left side the main poten- of food, to production methods used, up to a tial benefits expected by consumers, while change in the importance of the various cate- in the right side some potential problems are gories of food in their diet. Purchasing food on listed. SFSCs became a routine in particular when it Potential problems are quite similar than is interpreted as a way to demonstrate an ideo- for producers. Consumers have to reorganize logical opposition to the limits of dominant their buying process, partly abandoning their system of food production, processing and routines, spend more time in both purchas- distribution. ing and preparing food. Diseconomies can External consumers are normally less inter- emerge. More time and personal resources – ested in local food as such, although sometimes depending on the type of SFSC – can also be showing interest to support local producers needed for interact with producers and/or and to get fresh products, while are much more among consumers. interested in origin food to get closer to local Consumer satisfaction for SFSCs depends culture and traditions, to experiment new to a great extent on transforming the time food, and to have souvenirs to get back home. spent buying and preparing food from a Consumers are pushed to SFSC by different wasted time into an investment in terms of typologies of motivations; as a consequence, social relationships and responsibility.

30 DISPLAY THE POTENTIAL OF SFSCS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

Main expected benefits and potential problems for society as whole

EXPECTED BENEFITS POTENTIAL PROBLEMS

-- Reduction of transport -- Increase in the “real cost” of food -- Reduction of pollution (fuel, reduction in efficiency of resource plastic …) allocation -- Reduction of plastic packaging -- Transportation inefficiencies -- Less food waste -- Increased risks for food safety (less -- Improved diets: easier access to controls) fresh food, more variety in diet, less preservatives, … -- Preserving peri-urban agriculture -- Preserving small farming / artisanal food processing -- Preservation of traditional products -- Preservation of products based on local agro-biodiversity -- Strengthening social ties -- Increasing awareness about food system problems -- Working opportunities for women -- Explore niches of innovation

3.4. Expected benefits for society expected benefits and some potential prob- Society as a whole can benefit from SFSCs lems for society as a whole. thanks to the positive effects (or the contain- Expected benefits on the environment are ment of negative ones generated by the stand- related on the reduction of distance between ard food provisioning system) generated on places of production and consumption. collective well-being, in particular on the Consumption of products sourced at long (or following aspects: environment, health, social short) distances, in fact, raises transportation, ties, and ethics. This is a very relevant issue refrigeration, packaging and storage issues. in the light of the increasing awareness of the Apart from distance, there are other claims negative effects of industrialised food system on potential positive effects of SFSC on the on many social and environmental issues such environment. Long-distance, mass distri- as agrobiodiversity protection, traditions and bution channels are responsible – together culture preservation, social relations. with urbanization and changes in the compo- The following table summarizes the main sition of diets – of the impressive amount

DISPLAY THE POTENTIAL OF SFSCS DISPLAY THE POTENTIAL OF SFSCS 31 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

of food waste generated in our societies governance. They are also expected to pursue (World Resources Institute, 2013). They are social justice, equality and inclusion, being also considered a cause of biodiversity loss more accessible to smallholders and small (Godfray et al. 2010), as actors in the long processors and giving opportunities to buy and mass chains are encouraged to cultivate, quality food to lower income consumers. SFSC sell and consume only a few species and vari- can give a contribution to the preservation of eties. Globalized food chains also alters the local identities and lifestyles and to food secu- concept of seasonality, which is largely recog- rity in urban areas. They also can allow small nized as a key component of sustainable and farmers to access markets, especially when big healthy diets. Another claim relates to the retailers and powerful wholesalers dominate limited information regarding the environ- “normal” food chains. mental impact of the processes of production SFSC also create interesting opportunities and distribution consumers usually receive for valorising the work and enhance the role buying a globalized product (Goodman, 2002; and self-esteem of women in the farm, often Kastner et al., 2011), while SFSC can improve more inclined to managing customer rela- consumer knowledge and responsibility. tions. SFSC can also help in preserving a sustainable SFSCs can also affect some relevant ethical peri-urban agriculture, with positive effects profiles. The need to include ethical dimen- on the preservation of the quality of the envi- sions is becoming more important as demon- ronment around big cities (avoiding land strated by the huge rising of ethical standards abandonment, preserving uncovered soil, …). and labelling initiatives aiming at communi- SFSF impacts on health are not deeply cating attempts made by firms to ameliorate explored. In general terms, ‘localness’ of food the negative externalities of food provision- is connected to ‘healthiness’ by association ing (Goodman et al., 2010). However, assess with freshness, seasonality and affordability. ethical performance of a food chain is a very As SFSCs are connected to local agriculture, difficult matter. Fair trade, attention paid products marketed through them need less to the support to local economy and animal preservatives and are produced accordingly to welfare are among the ethical aspects to which local season. Relevant exceptions are mainly consumers pay more attention and to which in urban agriculture, where cultivation in SFSC can positively contribute. While in long, practiced in heated or cooled greenhouses. globalised food supply chains ethical perfor- Accessibility and affordability of local food mance is mostly communicated in formal purchased through SFSCs can reduce the cost terms, via labels, standards and certifications, of food and hence access for lower income in SFSC direct interaction is the main tool consumers to healthier food – such as the used. fresh one, mainly in big urban areas. Empirical evidence shows some difficulties SFSCs can also impact on a broad range in SFSC contribution to territorial rebalanc- of social issues, going beyond the idea of ing of agriculture, in fact access SFSC is more “plenty of cheap and safe food” definition of difficult for farmers and areas farthest away effective value chains. They are expected to from cities or touristic areas, where demand strengthen social capital, by improving rela- from consumers is stronger. So the poten- tionships between producers and consum- tial of re-territorialisation of short chain can ers, and promoting a more participated food result fairly small.

32 DISPLAY THE POTENTIAL OF SFSCS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

4. Effectiveness of Short Food Supply-Chains

4.1. Key-functions in SFSC and involved. Proposing a methodology for effectiveness assessing the effects of SFSC is out of the The achievement of the benefits from SFSCs scope of this paper. However, it is important expected by producers, consumers and a reflection about the determinants of SFSCs society as a whole is not automatic and, as effectiveness, taking into account the multi- mentioned in the previous sections, a plural- plicity of aspects involved. ity of factors can hinder it. Assessing the Cutting the number of steps in the supply- whole performance of supply chain is a very chains, reducing geographical distance complex matter, considering the plurality travelled by products, reorganizing produc- of dimensions and the diversity of actors ers-consumers interaction putting them into

Fig. 4.1 – Functions of SFSC and their effects

Logistic

1. On producers

Coordination SFSC 2. On consumers & Governance e ects

3. On society

Information & Guarantee

DISPLAY THE POTENTIAL OF SFSCS EFFECTIVENESS OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS 33 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

more direct contact, are distinctive features of 4.2. Coordination and governance SFSCs. Effective management of the supply- functions, and the issue of price chain is an objective of the SFSC model, too, regulation and risk sharing but this is done according to different logics As pointed out in the examples in Section and configurations as compared to long indus- 2, there is a great variety among SFSCs as trialized chains. The shortening of the supply regards the modalities different actors coor- chain - whatever the way it is carried out - dinate their production and exchange activi- entails a new way to organize and manage a ties. In many cases, the nature of coordination number of functions performed by the actors and governance in SFSCs described in Section at the different levels of the chain (Belletti 2 is quite different from the conventional one, and Marescotti, 2012 and 2013). Among these, considering both horizontal relations (among the following three categories of functions are producers and/or among buyers/consumers) particularly importance: and vertical relations (between farmers and customers). -- coordination and governance function, Coordination in long and industrialized expressed by the capacity SFSCs have to agri-food supply-chains is based on imper- design and control relevant aspects of the sonal relations between producers and transactions and interactions between consumers, managed with the intervention of different actors; intermediaries mainly through spot market -- logistic function, expressed by the capacity mechanisms5. SFSCs have to physically connect produc- A certain degree of horizontal coor- ers and consumers in an effective way, dination is often a key-element in many reducing distribution costs without gener- typologies of SFSCs. Consumers can join ating a parallel increase in agricultural to collectively organize their purchases. production costs; Solidarity Purchasing Groups and CSA initia- -- information function, related to the capac- tives represent the most evident examples. In ity SFSCs have to convey complex quality a number of cases, producers too collaborate attributes to which consumers are paying to activate SFSC initiatives. This happens for increasing attention. example quite often for farmers markets and farmers’ shops. The effectiveness in performing these three As far as vertical coordination is concerned, functions is the key factor for determining relationships linking producers to consumers the balance between benefits and costs of are stronger in SFSCs, especially in “alterna- SFSCs for producers, consumers and society tive” ones (see Section 1.2). When sourcing as a whole, as discussed in Section 3 (Figure via SFSCs, consumers normally pay higher 4.1), also compared to long supply-chains. attention to what they buy, how it is produced, Moreover, considering the great variety and and by whom it has been produced, therefore complexity of SFSC typologies (Section 2), it asking more information up to direct and/or is important in order to compare the different co-decide with the farmer the rules of produc- types of SFSFs initiatives, too. tion and the quality food must have. Often In the next sections we discuss coordina- consumers show the will to socialize with tion and governance, logistical and informa- producers, sharing values and ideas besides tion functions in SFSCs. We also provide some basic information on the product. Producers, examples of tools and good practices. too, aim at gathering more information on

5 This means that producers follow their own individual production plans determining volume and type of output to be produced and marketed, without previous interactions with customers, whose identity is unknown and not relevant for the seller, nor with other producers.

34 EFFECTIVENESS OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

consumers’ behaviours and habits within The intervention of the State, aimed at SFSCs, get opinions and suggestions directly prompting the provision of some public goods from the final users, and may aim at involv- (environment protection, social relations, ing consumers in their production decisions healthy food provision, etc.), characterizes (what, when, and how to produce, for example, a number of SFSC initiatives, and can affect as happens in Solidarity Purchasing Groups), their governance system. and sometimes to share the risk (as in CSA Considering the general aims of SFSC initi- initiatives). atives, one of most important issues is the Figure 4.2 outlines the range of SFSCs initi- possibility to implement governance of prices atives concerning the degree of interdepend- and risk sharing in order to attain a fair and ence between producers and consumers in transparent vertical distribution of the value decision-making. Traditional forms of selling, added created in the value-chain among the although classifiable as SFSCs, normally ask different actors involved in it. for a low degree of interdependence. A number In the agri-food system, farmers, consum- of SFSC initiatives (the ones at the right ers and public institutions are paying grow- extreme of the scheme) are characterized by ing attention to fairness and transparency in a certain degree of direct and long-standing price setting, market access for smallholders, interaction and interdependence between imperfections in competition, and abuses producers and consumers, who agree on some resulting from dominant positions, which relevant aspects of what and how to produce, are reflected in the mechanisms of value and share social, cultural, environmental, and distribution along the supply-chains. SFSCs moral values (such as in Solidarity Purchasing are expected to lead to economic benefits at Groups and CSA). both ends of the chain: if, on the one hand,

Fig. 4.2 – Typology of SFSCs initiatives according to the interdependence between producers and consumers in taking decisions

Farmers` markets On farm selling

Box schemes CSA Roadside selling CSA SPG Farmers` shops

Public Pick-your-own procurement

Source: elaboration from Belletti and Marescotti (2012) Marescotti and Belletti from elaboration Source: LOW HIGH

EFFECTIVENESS OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS EFFECTIVENESS OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS 35 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

consumers may benefit from lower purchase et al., 2010), which can balance the needs of prices, on the other hand producers can obtain both producers and consumers. To this aim higher prices than those resulting from place- in many typologies of SFSC price is some- ment on intermediate markets (wholesale, how negotiated and agreed by both farmers retail). These effects are partly related on how and consumers, mainly when interaction is logistical and informational functions are stronger and more continuous in time, putting performed in the SFSC (see next sub-sections). attention not simply on the absolute level of However, proponents of SFSC initiatives price but on the quality/price ratio, and also often urge the transition from a logic of “high” considering the value of external effects arising prices (for producers) or “low” prices (for from the performance of production processes consumers), to a logic of “right” price (Belletti (positive and negative externalities).

PRICE MANAGEMENT AT FARMERS’ MARKET (ITALY)

In Italy, farmers’ market rapid spread has in other markets, in some cases at been accompanied by a growing attention national level, in others at local level paid on economic effects on both farmers (local wholesale market, retail, direct and consumers. Expectations from farmers’ on-farm sales); markets development were focused on the -- Calculation of production costs. This increase of price for farmers and price reduc- approach provides for the reconstruc- tion for consumers that could be gained by tion of reference costs relating to cutting the intermediary steps. As a conse- single products and territorial areas, quence, many farmers’ markets put some with the aim of having a “standard!” mechanisms for controlling and managing value that can be useful both as a tool price levels of products exchanged. A survey of moral suasion towards producers carried out in Tuscany demonstrated a great and as a means of justifying higher variety of approach as regards price regula- prices than those found on other tion: channels; -- The reference to “non-price” conven- -- Monitoring and price comparison tions. In these cases, the focus is on with information to consumers, the interaction around the mean- based on price monitoring on other ings attributed to production and distribution channels in the same consumption rather than on price. area, which are then compared to the Producers and consumers are moti- prices applied in the farmers’ market. vated by specific values and can The reference is often to local retail develop a common vision, which prices, supplemented by information goes beyond the satisfaction of qual- on prices available on a national scale; ity organoleptic and nutritional -- Adjustment of the maximum price value of products, economic conven- level by comparison with other ience, etc.), making it possible to channels, providing for the setting find consistency also with respect to of maximum price ceilings calcu- public objectives (social and environ- lated on the basis of prices recorded mental justice, redistributive equity).

BOX 11 Source: Belletti et al. (2010) et Belletti Source:

36 EFFECTIVENESS OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

Other specific ways of governing value distri- Logistics encompasses a number of activ- bution along the chain, also taking in account ities, from order processing to warehous- risk sharing, is the one of Solidarity Purchasing ing, from storage to transportation and Groups and Community supported agricul- packaging. The number and complexity of ture. Within these SFSCs, long-term collab- these functions have grown with the increase orations develop between producers and of producers-consumers distance, changes in consumers, allowing for the development consumers’ shopping habits and consump- of a mutual trust that permits to manage the tion needs. In long food-chains, a number of phenomena of opportunism and free-riding specialized firms operating along the supply- on completely different bases with respect to chain performs them, while in the short ones the standard value chains. intermediate actors are eliminated or greatly reduced in number. 4.3. Logistic functions, and the issue of However, the elimination of some types of food hubs intermediate actors does not automatically Effectiveness in logistics consists in the abil- lead to the elimination of the need to perform ity to reduce distribution costs without gener- the relative functions, and indeed some of ating corresponding higher costs borne by them still must be carried out. Rather, it is a farmers and consumers, and thus to increase matter of selecting and re-distributing func- the benefits for actors operating at the two tions among different actors of the agrifood extremes of supply chains. system. SFSCs eliminate certain types of

Fig. 4.3 – Functions in agrifood chains

a) general representation

First Intermediation Intermediation FARMER processing and Processing Storage and Distribution CONSUMER transportation transportation

b) farmers`market model

First Intermediation Intermediation FARMER processing and Processing Storage and Distribution CONSUMER transportation transportation

c) pick-your-own model

First Intermediation Intermediation FARMER processing and Processing Storage and Distribution CONSUMER transportation transportation Source: Belletti et al. (2010) et Belletti Source:

EFFECTIVENESS OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS EFFECTIVENESS OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS 37 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

players (such as international traders, food resources they have to use for managing the processing firms, large-scale retailers), to new functions, in particular of family labour, the advantage of others who must bear the which depends on contingent situation of burden, or who knowingly cut out the service each farm and family. In general terms, there offered by a particular function (for example, is no a better solution fitting for all farmers. non-seasonal availability provided by cold However, the more SFSC becomes part of storage and/or purchasing in different parts the strategic orientation for the farmer, the of the world) (King, 2010). more he must bear costs required by the tran- The shift from long and standard produc- sition to a new organisation model, which may tion-distribution-consumption systems to ask for investment in both tangible and intan- SFSC requires, therefore, both a removal gible assets, such as costs for acquiring the and a reallocation of functions performed by needed knowledge, building or adapting farm actors expelled from the supply-chain, which facilities and equipment, reorganising busi- must at least in part be assumed by actors at ness operations. For farmers, adopting a SFSC the extremes of the same chain, that is farmers orientation normally implies (Brunori et al., and consumers (see Figure 4.3). 2010): Therefore, the issue regarding effec- tiveness in logistics should be analysed by -- increasing the number of production understanding which logics and consequent processes and products produced, to approaches are more effective in providing meet consumers’ expectation; these functions, and whether they affect the -- re-incorporating phases and activi- organisation of production and trade inside ties previously abandoned: transport, the chain. conservation, physical presence on the A first approach is based on the search for markets for sale; economies of scale, related to creating large -- activating food processing, to make the volumes in the same technical unit of produc- product more conservable or increase tion that specialises in performing a single the added value; function; this allows a stronger economic -- diversify towards non-traditional activ- advantage where fixed costs are very high ities but useful as a sales support (e.g. compared to total costs. This is the approach educational activities, farm holidays) normally used in industrialized food systems or as tools for benefiting of a new multi- by large firms. functional orientation. An alternative approach focuses on scope economies, achievable using a given produc- It is evident that efficiency losses due to tion factor in several different but comple- de-specialization and lower achievable econo- mentary economic activities. For example, a mies of scale are possible. However, the extent farmer can use his own labour and of his family and type of costs incurred by farmers vary members not only for cultivating the land, but depending on the characteristics of the SFSC also for processing, selecting, or selling prod- initiative and the intensity of the relationship ucts, as to achieve a better level of utilisation with consumers. of the factor. This method asks for higher Consumers too incur new costs, related diversification of tasks, and it is common on to change in their purchasing behaviour SFSCs. and routines, and to the need to perform Both methods can be efficient for farmers, some functions which on other channels are depending on the type of farm, on structural normally delegated to specialize firms (eg. characteristics and on specific aims the farmer clean-up tasks or preparation of vegetables) pursue. Their effectiveness depends by a large (Briamonte and Giuca, 2010; Brunori et al., amount also on the cost/opportunity ratio of 2012).

38 EFFECTIVENESS OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

Therefore, the redistribution of functions hub is a “business or organization that actively between farmers and consumers is not manages the aggregation, distribution, and always more efficient in SFSCs than the marketing of course-identified food products conventional ones. Depending on the specific primarily from local and regional producers initiative, the way it is organized, and the to strengthen their ability to satisfy whole- individual characteristics of actors involved, sale, retail, and institutional demand.”. Food costs savings due to economies of scope do hubs operate in various ways on local markets not always compensate the increase in costs between those who produce food and those due to the loss in terms of scale economies. who buy it, in order to facilitate the connec- To obviate these problems responses can tions between local producers and consum- be worked out in SFSCs at the organisational ers (and in particular, professional buyers) level, abandoning an individualistic approach and reduce costs for logistics. Fragmentation and developing collective initiatives based of the agricultural supply is one of the major on sharing some phases and tasks of distribu- problems in SFSC initiatives. To solve it, food tion and logistics in order to achieve a more hubs normally aim at aggregating the supply rational organisation of certain activities of numerous small producers as to facilitate affected by constraints of minimum scale. the purchase by professional buyers, such as Food hubs are an emerging organiza- public and private canteens (schools, hospi- tional arrangement that aims at facilitat- tals, company canteens), local restaurants, ing the interaction between production and small local processing companies, and so on. consumption through SFSCs. According to Moreover, food hubs represent an impor- the USDA’s Regional Food Hub Resource tant source of information about quanti- Guide (Barham et al., 2012), a regional food ties and qualities respectively supplied and

Stand of the Delicious Montenegro Brand at a local fair, Montenegro

EFFECTIVENESS OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS EFFECTIVENESS OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS 39 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

COMMERCIAL FOOD-HUBS (HUNGARY)

Foodhub.hu is a commercial food-hub based They provide the following services: in Budapest (Hungary). Its mission is to For producers: transportation, processing, solve inefficiencies in the local food distri- packaging and labelling, marketing and sales bution by providing the tools and knowledge activities to develop a resilient local food economy. For food businesses: platform of hand- They support small-scale producers with picked producers and quality products, demand-driven advisory services while order and delivery system. Currently, they providing chefs and consumers with on-de- supply restaurants twice a week with local mand access to quality products. They facil- produce and soon will extend the portfolio itate relationships between food system to deliver up to 500 boxes to chilled pickup actors to build a community that fosters stations for endconsumers. transparency and fair business. Cash & Carry: Foodhub.hu offers cash Foodhub.hu reconnects small-scale & carry concept with fresh products for farmers directly with businesses looking restaurants each Thursday. In the mean- for local, high-quality fresh ingredients, be time, for households, there is an on-line sale they restaurants, farmer’s markets or food with direct delivery by Foodhub’s truck. retailers. They are serving 31 farmers and 22 Education: Furthermore, there is a close restaurants. collaboration between schools “Grow & The aim of Foofhub.hu is to empower Harvest your own potatoes” and farms. farmers by creating a market for their Food Waste: Foodhub.hu is engaged in food high-quality, local and sustainably grown waste reduction. All food leftovers are given produce; the gastronomy and food retail to the Hungarian Foodbank. sector by offering nutritious and healthy Café, Co-Working Office: Additionally, food for their customers; consumers by FoodHub runs an Urban Food Coworking giving them a platform to make conscious & Café, which is a quiet place to work in the food choices. city for producers and for gastro-bloggers.

BOX 12 Source: Foodhub.hu Source:

demanded on the local market, thus facilitat- pass from the warehouse of the food hub. In ing supply programming by farmers, meeting practice there are number of food hubs that sellers and buyers, and reducing losses along combine the two typologies. the supply chain. Food hubs, in particular the physical ones, These two functions (supply concentration can provide for a lot of other services, such and information provision) can be performed as cold rooms, packaging and first process- by both a physical and virtual food hub. The ing facilities, and quality control and assur- former delivers agricultural products thanks ance services. As they might serve different to facilities where customers go to buy them, purposes and adapt to local resources and the latter uses online platforms that provide needs, such as provision of incubation units the possibility for farmers and buyers to for new entrepreneurs, or space for commu- insert respectively their availability and nity education and action, they are also called needs, in the short and eventually in the “multifunctional food hubs” (Guzman and medium run, but products do not physically Reynolds, 2019).

40 EFFECTIVENESS OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

A regional food hub can (Barham et al., 2012, creation of food hubs. Although similar to some p. 4): enterprises that perform the same functions in the industrialized food chains, food hubs are -- carry out or coordinate the aggregation, different from these. In many cases, they are distribution, and marketing of primarily deliberately set up to be “alternative”, based on locally/regionally produced foods from shared ethical principles, such as enable small- multiple producers to multiple markets; scale producers to access value chains and -- consider producers as valued business larger markets and more regular delivery, in partners instead of interchangeable order to ensure their financial security. A focus suppliers, and is committed to buying can be devoted to fair trade, local origin of food, from small to mid-sized local producers food waste reduction, environmental care, whenever possible; minimal processing of food, health-related -- work closely with producers, particularly considerations. In some cases, food hubs may small-scale operations, to ensure they wish to collect and distribute food for charita- can meet buyer requirements by either ble purposes (for example via food banks). providing technical assistance or finding Food hubs are established, developed, and partners that can provide this technical supported by different types of organizations, assistance; such as voluntary sector organisations, food -- use product differentiation strategies to partnerships and other strategic food initia- ensure that producers get a good price tives and coops, with the involvement of both for their products. Examples of product producers and buyers. In other cases, food hubs differentiation strategies include identity are managed by for-profit commercial compa- preservation (knowing who produced it nies that operate however oriented by the and where it comes from), group brand- values mentioned above. ing, specialty product attributes (such as heirloom or unusual varieties), and 4.4. Information and guarantee sustainable production practices (such as functions, and the issue of common certified organic, minimum pesticides, or labelling “naturally” grown or raised). Effectiveness in information function is related to conveying information about qual- A great variety characterizes not only the typol- ity attributes of the product along the chain,

Source: Foodhub.hu Source: ogies, but also the motivations underlying the from producers to consumers.

FARMERS OWNED FOOD-HUBS (USA)

Appalachian Sustainable Development is a in its packaging and grading facility and distrib- non-profit in Abingdon, USA. In 1999, ASD utes them to 30 food brokers and supermarkets, established Appalachian Harvest (AH), a representing more than 900 individual super- network of approximately 50 certified-organic markets. ASD also offers training and technical family farmers producing organic vegetables assistance by organizing hands-on trainings for and free-range eggs in Southwest Virginia and producers and by coordinating a peer network Northeast Tennessee. Appalachian Harvest for producers to learn from one another. Annual grades, washes, labels, and packages products sales are approximately $500,000 (2012).

BOX 13 Source: Barahm et al. (2012) et Barahm Source:

EFFECTIVENESS OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS EFFECTIVENESS OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS 41 EFFECTIVENESS OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS

LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

Transmission of information becomes more However, a regulatory measure may be relevant in relation to food products with appropriate in order to monitor problematic more complex quality attributes, such as aspects related to lack of transparency or to the “credence” ones, which are those qual- unfair internal competition (such as use of ity attributes not verifiable by the consumer non-local ingredients in traditional recipes, even after repeated consumption. These sale of non-local products as local, declara- attributes include, for example, the origin of tion of non-existent characteristics related to the product, the effects on specific environ- the environmental or social sustainability of mental aspects, the use of particular growing production processes). Regulatory measures or processing techniques and ingredients, can be created and managed by producers and/ the respect for workers’ rights. Information or consumers who launched the SFSC initia- asymmetry occurs frequently on these quality tive, or by public bodies, such as in the case of attributes, in particular in long chains where initiatives which benefit from public support. many actors from many places in the world Rules normally manage both actors’ participa- intervene in the production and distribution tion/exclusion and more practical functioning process. Therefore, the market often fails to aspects of the initiative. provide correct and complete information, Information is often conveyed by collective thus leading to possible market failures. This branding, especially focused on emphasis- asks for some mechanisms of assurances, such ing localness of food and other specific qual- as third-party certifications, which however ity characteristics of the product. Collective can be complex to manage and costly (espe- branding implies to define what information cially for smallholders), generating adverse have to be communicated through the brand selection effects and excluding some catego- (common rules), build collective initiatives to ries of producers who, by their very nature, support the brand on the market, and set-up cannot adapt to these schemes and afford the some form of guarantee of the “content” of necessary investments. the brand. In general, information efficiency of SFSCs Three main issues normally arises: is positively related to the intensity of coor- dination and interdependence of decisions -- Why and how to set rules about “true” between producers and consumers. SFSCs local food initiatives - thanks to the more direct and -- How to signal the local origin of food on strict interaction between producers and the market consumers - can better convey complex qual- -- How to guarantee purchasers on the ity attributes relating to both the production local origin of food in an effective way. process and the product itself in a more effec- tive and/or less expensive way. Especially in As we have seen in Section 1, local food is not the typologies where a greater collaboration just a matter of provenance, but it may also between producers and consumers allows involve the link to local specific resources developing personal trust in relationships, (e.g. local agrobiodiversity) and methods of SFSCs are suitable tools to make the exchange production (can a GM tomato grown close of products with special quality attributes to the place of consumption following ultra- easier, allowing both market access for small modern techniques be considered as “local farmers and access to “good, clean and fair” tomato”?). Rules play three many functions, food by consumers at a more affordable price. that is: 1) defining a shared concept of local This also enhances the diversity of food, and food, both for producers and consumers; strengthens social and environmental exter- 2) managing unfair competition: avoiding nalities linked to the production and exchange free-riding between producers inside the processes. local system; 3) communicating clear quality

42 EFFECTIVENESS OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS EFFECTIVENESS OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS

LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

characteristics to consumers. Rules-setting on basket of local foods, or branding restau- process is of paramount importance. Indeed, rants which buy from local producers are just participative techniques can help producers in among the possible ways. clarifying what has to be defined and labelled More or less formal guarantee systems as “local”, which in some cases may imply to may be needed to make a brand and, more in modify accordingly their production prac- general, communication effective. The guaran- tices, and help them to fully understand and tee system should take into account the charac- share the meaning of local. The role of public teristics and requirements of each marketing actors is often key in supporting and enabling channel. Besides the more formal third-party rules-setting processes. certification systems, in SFSCs initiatives there Local origin of food can be signalled in are emerging tools involving producers and many ways, also considering the legal tools consumers in guaranteeing “true” local food, available in a specific context, and setting-up such as participatory guarantee systems able to and management costs. Branding farmers’ enhance the proximity between producers and markets, developing collective trademarks consumers at lower costs.

SFSC LABELLING IN LOCAL RESTAURANTS (ITALY)

Tourism can offer very interesting opportu- Vetrina Toscana organizes initiatives nities for valorising local products. However, throughout Tuscany, involving restaurants restaurants very often don’t have the incen- and suppliers in a scheme that valorizes origin tive to really use local ingredients in their reci- products, cultural establishments (museums, pes, included the traditional ones. Labelling music festivals, artistic heritage) and artisanal restaurants engaged in purchasing local and crafts. Apart from events aimed at tourists, origin products can give e relevant contribu- there are also masterclasses, workshops and tion. seminars organised for professionals involved Vetrina Toscana (Regione Toscana, Italy) in restaurants, in order to deepening knowl- is a project of Regione Toscana and Tuscany’s edge and making professional contacts. Regional Chamber of Commerce aiming at Vetrina Toscana develops a communi- promoting restaurants and producers which cation strategy based on the website www. make use of Tuscan agrifood products. The vetrina.toscana.it and on a calendar of events, mission is to strengthening the position social media, a dedicated app, newletters and competitiveness of local small farmers and invitations. Vetrina Toscana is strongly and microbusinesses in the fields of food integrated with the Regione Toscana’s tour- commerce and catering, valorising the iden- ism portal (visittuscany.com). This allows tity of tourist destinations by means of agri- restaurants, shops and producers who have cultural products. signed up to interact with the region’s digital To take part in the project, restaurants, ecosystem, helping to combine the opportu- grocers and producers sign a manifesto which nities in enogastronomy with those in tour- contains product specifications. Today, more ism. Restaurants taking part to the initiative than 1000 restaurants, 300 speciality grocers expose a window sticker in order to communi- and 150 producers take part to this initiative. cate to consumers the specificity of their offer.

BOX 14 Source: https://www.vetrina.toscana.it/en/the-project/ Source:

EFFECTIVENESS OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS EFFECTIVENESS OF SHORT FOOD SUPPLY-CHAINS 43 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

5. The way forward. Some reflections for action

Short food supply chains showed up as a new conditions. Consumers too may benefit from model of organization in the agribusiness that participating to SFSCs initiatives, as they can seek to merge economic principles with social often buy fresher and more diversified prod- and environmental issues. Indeed, SFSCs ucts at lower prices, with potential positive initiatives display high potential to reconnect consequences on their health. farmers to consumers, and exert benefits for But the merits of SFSCs go well beyond both sides of the market. the pure economic sphere. Indeed, both From an economic point of view, SFSCs social and environmental positive effects initiatives may bring benefits to farmers, may be achieved, and from many points of increasing their value added and business view. Producers can communicate directly to stability, especially for smaller and poorer consumers and vice versa, easing the flow of ones, which are facing problems to access information about the product, the process, markets on long and globalized chains at fair and the participants, strengthening social ties,

Fig.5.1 – A map of SFSCs typologies

Ho.RE.Ca.

TURE Public/ Collective Food Procurement hub L AGRICUL ONSUMERS C CA LO Farmers` markets, Farmer` shops

SPGs, CSA, box schemes, consumer` managed shops

on-farm selling, pick-your-own, roadside selling

44 THE WAY FORWARD. SOME REFLECTIONS FOR ACTION LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

solidarity, and awareness. The reduction of focusing and targeting the initiative. the distance between the place of production and the place of consumption may contrib- -- Identification of the most promising ute to lower environmental impact due to local supply chains emissions. The higher diversity of products -- Understanding local food system char- supplied within these initiatives may also acteristics and dynamics (market intel- contribute to improve agro-biodiversity. ligence) In short, ethical values are often the core of -- Defining the specific characteristics of SFSCs initiatives, representing an alternative local products to be marketed to long chains.. -- Targeting (market positioning studies) However, SFSC world is very complex and differentiated. This document has shown CHOSING THE RIGHT INITIATIVE(S) different modalities and typologies of SFSC Among the many SFSCs initiatives, which initiatives (fig.5.1) that are currently used one(s) would fit better to enhance local to achieve these objectives, and provided productions and achieve the stated objectives? case-studies and examples. Indeed, turning potential into practice is -- Identification of the potential initia- not always an easy task, and there are many tives that would fit better among the limits and problems to overcome. Shortage of many available farmers at local level, low quality and/or avail- -- Analysis of the advantages and disad- ability of products and low diversification of vantages of each potential initiative in products to supply, insufficient know-how and relation to the characteristics of the entrepreneurship, inadequacy of collective local food systems organisation, poor equipment and logistical infrastructure, difficulty in communicating MOBILIZING ACTORS AND COLLECTIVE the specificities of local products to consum- GOVERNANCE ers, are just examples of hindrances that may Most of SFSCs initiatives ask for collective impede to grasp the opportunities offered by action. Local producers and consumers, at SFSCs initiatives. Farmers’ and consumers’ the core of SFSCs, have to be mobilized and collective initiatives, and a certain degree of organized, and support to existing associ- coordination between producers and consum- ations should be provided. Participatory ers, can often overcome these limits and prob- governance mechanisms should be eased, able lems. to include all actors, with special emphasis on To synthesize, especially when launching a micro, small and medium enterprises, local collective SFSC initiative aiming at promoting producers associations, supply-chains actors. local agriculture, a careful planning should be External actors (both private and public) done since the beginning, taking into account should be included as to guarantee techni- the objectives the different actors involved cal and financial assistance, visibility, and aim to achieve. The main steps and areas of support. intervention for launching a SFSC initiative may be summarized as follows: -- Mobilizing producers and/or consum- ers UNDERSTANDING AND TARGETING -- Setting-up collective organization and The first step is clearly identifying the supply- governance chains and territories where the SFSC initi- -- Building networks with external actors ative has to be set up. Once identified, an -- Getting human and financial resources analysis of local food system characteristics -- Asking for public support and legitima- and evolution should be provided, to better tion

THE WAY FORWARD. SOME REFLECTIONS FOR ACTION 45 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

SETTING UP HUMAN COMPETENCES AND should circulate within producers-con- PHISICAL INFRASTRUCTURE sumers networks and in the wider societal Addressing SFSC is an innovation involving private-public network. Promotion should many aspects for both producers and consum- emphasize the merits of the initiatives, also ers. Both human competences and physical by means of branding and guarantee systems, infrastructure are keys for launching SFSCs and enlarging the scope to connect to other initiatives and making them sustainable and local initiatives and capitals. self-regenerating. Human capital needs to -- Information: Branding, guaranteeing, be qualified and re-oriented to the new tasks and promoting asked for these initiatives. Logistic issues are -- Networking and integration with local highly important and sensitive for economic capitals sustainability and efficiency, as well as new equipment required to actors for participat- In this context, governmental and non-gov- ing. ernmental organizations can support producers in designing effective SFSC -- Logistic management (food hubs… initiatives, helping to overcoming prob- supply concentration, selection, regu- lems and attaining a number of public goals. larity…) The potential of SFSC initiatives to recon- -- Human capital: new skills and know- nect producers and consumers at local how (education) level, and involve not just the “productive” -- Upgrading to minimum (i.e. food part of the food system, but also the social, safety) and quality standards cultural, environmental, ethic dimensions, may ask the design of a wider local food INFORMING AND PROMOTING policy, which aims at integrating and coor- Information and education are normally dinating the different initiatives around emphasized in SFSCs initiatives. Information food provision.

Promotion of local products at a local fair in Tanzania

46 THE WAY FORWARD. SOME REFLECTIONS FOR ACTION LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

References

Aguglia L. (2009), “La filiera corta: una opportunità “Agricoltori e filiera corta: profili giuridici e dinamiche per agricoltori e consumatori”, Agriregionieuropa, 5(17), socio-economiche”, INEA, Roma, pp.45-62. pp.16-20. Belletti G., Marescotti A. (2013), “Potenzialità e limiti Alkon AH. (2008), “From value to values: sustaina- delle iniziative di filiera corta”, Progress in Nutrition, ble consumption at farmers markets”, Agriculture and 15(3), pp.146-162. Human Values, 25, pp.487-498. Belletti G., Marescotti A., Innocenti S., Rossi A. Allen P., FitzSimmons M., Goodman M., Warner (2010), “Prezzo giusto e filiera corta: una lettura dell’es- K. (2003), “Shifting plates in the agri-food landscape: perienza dei mercati dei produttori agricoli in Toscana”, the tectonics of alternative agrifood initiatives in Agriregionieuropa, VI, n.23. California”, Journal of Rural Studies, n.19, pp.61-75. Bérard L., Marchenay P. (2006), “Local products and Anderson M.D. (2008), “Rights-based food systems geographical indications: taking account of local knowl- and the goals of food systems reform”, Agriculture and edge and biodiversity”, International Social Science Human Values, n.25, pp.593-608. Journal, 187, pp.109-116. Barham J., Tropp D., Dimitri C. (2012), “Regional Briamonte L., Giuca S. (Eds.), (2010), Food hubs and Food Value Chains”, USDA, PPT pres- “Comportamenti e consumi socialmente responsabili entation nel sistema agroalimentare”, INEA, Roma. Barham J., Tropp D., Enterline K., Farbman J., Fisk J., Brown A. (2001), “Counting farmers’ markets”, Kiraly S. (2012), Regional Food Hub Resource Guide. U.S. Geographical Review, 91(4), pp.655-674. Dept. of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service. Brunori G. (2007), “Local food and alternative food Washington, DC. networks: a communication perspective”, in: Amilien Bavec S., Machado Bouroullec D., Raynaud E. (2017), V., Holt G. (Ed.), “From local food to localised food”, “Analysis of Short Food Supply Chain Governances: Anthropology of Food, S2, Mars, special issue. Innovative Collective Platforms Supplying Local Brunori G., Galli F. (2012), “Verso una ristorazione Produce”, International Journal of Food System scolastica italiana più sostenibile: sustainable public Dynamics, Proceedings in System Dynamics and procurement”, Agriregionieuropa, 8(29), pp.71-75. Innovation in Food Networks 2017 pp.283-288. Brunori G., Rossi A., Cerruti R., Guidi F. (2009), Belletti G., Casabianca F., Marescotti A. (2012), Nicchie produttive e innovazione di sistema: un’analisi “Local food quality and local resources”, in: Arfini secondo l’approccio delle transizioni tecnologiche attra- F., Mancini M.C., Donati M. (Eds), “Local Agri- verso il caso dei farmers’ markets in Toscana, Economia food Systems in a Global World: Market, Social and Agro-alimentare, n.3, pp.1-29. Environmental Challenges”, Cambridge Scholars Brunori G., Rossi A., Guidi F. (2012), “On the new social Publishing, Cambridge, pp.71-96. relations around and beyond food. Analysing consumers’ Belletti G., Favilli E., Marescotti A., Pinducciu D. role and action in Gruppi di Acquisto Solidale (Solidarity (2013), “La valorizzazione commerciale delle produzioni Purchasing Groups)”, Sociologia Ruralis, 52(1), pp.1-30. di razze autoctone: i risultati di una analisi del posizion- Brunori G., Rossi A., Malandrin V. (2010), amento sul mercato”, Agriregionieuropa, 9(32), Marzo, “Co-producing transition: innovation processes in farms pp.36-40. adhering to Solidarity-based Purchase Groups (GAS) Belletti G., Marescotti A. (2011), “Origin products, in Tuscany, Italy”, International Journal of Sociology of GI special protection schemes and rural development”, Agriculture & Food, 18(1), pp.28-53. in: Barham E., Sylvander B. (Eds.), “Labels of Origin for Cofie O., Danso G., Larbi T., Kufogbe S.K., Obiri- Food. Local Development, Global Recognition”, CABI Opareh N., Abraham E., Henseler M. (2006), “Urban International, Cambridge (USA), pp.75-91. Agriculture in Accra, Ghana Assessing Livelihood Belletti G., Marescotti A. (2012), “L’innovazione Potentials and Policy Mechanisms”, Working paper, economica della filiera corta”, in: Giaré F., Giuca S. (Ed.), RUAF project.

47 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

Coley D., Howard M., Winter M. (2009), “Local food, Environment and Planning A, 42, pp.1782-1796. food miles and carbon emissions: A comparison of farm Guzman and Reynolds (2019), “Food Hubs in the shop and mass distribution approaches”, Food Policy, UK: Where are we and what next?”, Food Research 34(2), pp.150–155. Collaboration Food Policy Discussion Paper Committee of the Regions (2011) Opinion of the Hand MS., Martinez S. (2010), “Just What Does Committee of the Regions on ‘Local food systems’ Local Mean?”, Choices, 25(1). (outlook opinion) (C 104/01). Hoekstra F., Small R. (2010), “Vegetable Box Scheme Dunne J.B., Chambers K.J., Giombolini K.J., Schlegel in Cape Town, South Africa”, Urban Agriculture S.A. (2010), “What does ‘local’ mean in the grocery store? Magazine, n.24, September Multiplicity in food retailers’ perspectives on sourcing Hogan L., Thorpe S. (2009), “Issues in food miles and marketing local foods”, Renewable Agriculture and and carbon labeling”, ABARE research report 09.18, Food Systems, 26(19), pp.46–59. Canberra, December. Durham CA., King RP., Roheim CA. (2009), Holloway L., Kneafsey M., Venn L., Cox R., Dowler “Consumer definitions of ‘locally grown’ for fresh fruits E., Tuomainen H. (2007), “Possible Food Economies: and vegetables”, Journal of Food Distribution Research, a Methodological Framework for Exploring Food March, pp.23-30. Production–Consumption Relationships”, Sociologia EIP-AGRI (2014), “Focus Group Short Food Supply- Ruralis, 47(1), January, pp.1-19. Chain Management”, Discussion Paper, 1st Meeting in Ilbery B., Maye D. (2005), “Alternative (shorter) Prague on 10-11 December. food supply chains and specialist livestock products European Committee of the Regions (2018), in the Scottish - English borders”, Environment and “Sustainable public procurement of food”, European Planning, n.37, pp.823-844. Union, Bruxelles https://cor.europa.eu/en/engage/stud- Kebir L., Torre A. (2013), “Geographical proxim- ies/Documents/sustainable-public-procurement-food. ity and new short food supply chain”, in: Lazzeretti L. pdf (Ed.), “Creative Industries and Innovation in Europe. Feagan R. (2007), “The place of food: mapping out Concepts, Measures, and Comparative Case Studies”, the ‘local’ in local food systems”, Progress in Human Routledge, New York. Geography, 31(1), pp.23-42. Kirwan J. (2004), “Alternative Strategies in the Fernandes A.Z., Machado J.G.C.F., Pigatto G., UK Agro-Food System: Interrogating the Alterity of Lourenzani A.E.B.S. (2016), “Facilitadores e obstáculos Farmers’ Markets”, Sociologia Ruralis, 44(4), October, para a implantação de um projeto de turismo rural sob pp. 396-415. a ótica das cadeias curtas de comercialização”, Campo. Kirwan J. (2006), “The interpersonal world of direct Território, v.11, pp.170-192. marketing: examining conventions of quality at UK Fonte M. (2013), “Food consumption as social prac- farmers’ markets”, Journal of Rural Studies, 22, pp.301- tice: Solidarity Purchasing Groups in Rome, Italy”, 12. Journal of Rural Studies, n.32, pp.230-239. Kneafsey M., Holloway L., Cox R., Dowler E., Venn Galli F., Brunori G. (Eds.) (2013), “Short Food Supply L., Tuomainen H. (2008), “Reconnecting Consumers, Chains as drivers of sustainable development. Evidence Producers and Food: Exploring Alternatives”, Berg, Document”. Document developed in the framework Oxford. of the FP7 project FOODLINKS (GA No. 265287). Kneafsey, M., Venn, L., Schmutz, U., Balázs, B., Laboratorio di studi rurali Sismondi. Trenchard, L., Eyden-Wood, T., Bos E., Sutton G., Goodman D. (2002), “Rethinking food produc- Blackett, M. (2013). Short food supply chains and local tion-consumption: integrative perspectives”, food systems in the EU. Scientific and Policy Report, Sociologia Ruralis, 42(4), pp.271–277. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute Goodman D., DuPuis M.E., Goodman M.K. (2011), for Prospective Technological Studies, Luxemburg. “Alternative Food Networks: Knowledge, Practice and Lamine C. (2005), “Settling Shared Uncertaintines: Politics”, Routledge, London. Local Partnerships Between Producers and Goodman M.K., Maye D., Holloway L. (2010), “Ethical Consumers”, Sociologia Ruralis, 45(4), October, pp.324- foodscapes: premises, promises and possibilities”, 345.

48 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

Leffew M., Ernst M.D. (2014), “A Farmer’s Guide to review of conceptual approaches and prospects for an a Pick-Your-Own Operation”, University of Tennessee, integrative transitional framework. Journal of environ- Knoxville, TN, USA. mental management, 90, pp. 112-123. Lima F.S., Pigatto G., Machado J.G.C.F. (2018), Rossi A., Brunori G., Guidi F. (2008), “I mercati “Colha-e-pague como estratégia de distribuição direta contadini: un’esperienza di innovazione di fronte ai de alimentos da produção rural”. In: 56º Congresso dilemmi della crescita”, Rivista di Diritto Alimentare, da Sociedade Brasileira de Economia, Administração 2(3), Luglio-Settembre, pp.21-26. e Sociologia e Rural. Campinas (SP), 29 de julho a 01 Rossi A., Favilli E., Brunori G. (2013), “Il ruolo emer- agosto de 2018. gente dei civic food networks nell’innovazione attorno Marsden T. (2000), “Food Matters and the Matter al cibo”, Agriregionieuropa, 32(9), Marzo, pp.6-9. of Food: Towards a New Food Governance?”, Sociologia Rossi A., Guidi F., Innocenti S. (A cura di) (2008), Ruralis, 40(1), pp.20-29. “Guida per l’attivazione di forme collettive di vendita Martinez S., Hand M., Da Pra M., Pollack S., Vogel S., diretta. Esperienze, approcci, strumenti”, Manuale Clark S., Lohr R., Low S., Newman C. Ralston K., Smith ARSIA, Firenze. T., (2010), “Local Food Systems. Concepts, Impacts, Slee B., Kirwan J. (2007), “Exploring hybridity in and Issues”, USDA Economic Research Service, Report food supply chains”, 105th EAAE Seminar ‘International n.97, May. Marketing and International Trade of Quality Food McGarry M., Spittler A., Ahern J. (2005), “A profile Products’, Bologna, Italy, March 8-10. of farmers’ market consumers and the perceived advan- Sonnino R., Marsden T. (2006), “Beyond the divide: tages of produce sold at farmers’ markets”, Journal of rethinking relationships between alternative and Food Distribution Research, 36(1), pp.192–201. conventional food networks in Europe”, Journal of Mount P. (2012), “Growing local food: scale and local Economic Geography, 6, pp.181-199. food systems governance”, Agriculture and Human SUSTAIN (2008), “Ethical Hijack. Why the terms Values, n.29 pp.107–121. “local”, “seasonal” and “farmers’ market” should be Moustier P., Danso G. (2006), “Local economic defended from abuse by the food industry”, December. development and marketing of urban produced Tovey H. (2009), “‘Local Food’ as a Contested food”, Cities farming for the future: Urban agriculture Concept: Networks, Knowledges and Power in Food- for green and productive cities, pp.174-195. based Strategies for Rural Development”, International Moustier, P., Renting, H. (2015), “Urban agricul- Journal of Soc. of Agr. & Food, 16(2), pp.21-35. ture and short chain food marketing in developing Tregear A. (2007), “Proximity and typicity: a typol- countries”, in: de Zeeuw, H., Drechsel, P. (Eds), “Cities ogy of local food identities in the marketplace”, in: and Agriculture—Developing Resilient Urban Food Amilien V., Holt G. (Ed.), “From local food to localised Systems”, Routledge, pp.121-138. food”, Anthropology of Food, S2, mars, special issue. Pinto B., Pasqualotto A., Levidow L., (2010), Tregear A., Arfini F., Belletti G., Marescotti A. “Community Supported Urban Agriculture: The Orti (2007), “Regional foods and rural development: the role Solidali project in Rome”, Urban Agriculture magazine, of product qualification”, Journal of Rural studies, n.23, n.24, September. pp.12-22. Pretty JN., Ball AS., Lang T., Morison JIL. (2005), Vecchio R. (2011), “Local Food at Italian Farmers’ “Farm costs and food miles: An assessment of the full Markets: Three Case Studies”, International Journal of cost of the UK weekly food basket”, Food Policy, n.30, Sociology of Agriculture & Food 17(2), pp.122-139. pp.1-19 Watts D.C.H., Ilbery B., Maye D. (2005), “Making Renting H., Marsden T., Banks J. (2003), reconnections in agro-food geography: alterna- “Understanding alternative food networks: exploring tive systems of food provision”, Progress in Human the role of short food supply chains in rural develop- Geography, 29(1), pp.22-40. ment”, Environment and Planning, A 35, pp.393-411 Woods M. (2008), “Social movements and rural Renting, H., Rossing, W. A. H., Groot, J. C. J., Van der politics”, Journal of Rural Studies, n.24, pp.129–137. Ploeg, J. D., Laurent, C., Perraud, D., ... & Van Ittersum, World Resources Institute (2013), “Reducing food M. K. (2009). Exploring multifunctional agriculture. A loss and waste”, Washington.

49 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

Annex – UNIDO case study Boosting market access and local development of the fig farmers‘ community of Djebba, Tunisia

The mountainous village of Djebba is located in the North-West of Tunisia, around 150 kilo- meters from the capital Tunis, surrounded by ancient roman settlements and beautiful landscapes. Fig production is the main source of revenue of farmers in Djebba. The unique fig variety Bouhouli that has been cultivated for centuries can only be found in this village. In 2012 the Tunisian Ministry of Agriculture has officially recognized its unique quality attributes by protecting the Djebba fig with a geographical indication (GI). The label stands for authenticity, tradi- tional production practices and common commitment to quality by the local produc- ers. The GI fig is the first fruit in Tunisia that has obtained this origin-linked label. After the law was passed UNIDO has been support- Figs market in Djebba, Tunisia ing Djebba farmers to comply with the prod- uct specifications of the GI in the framework To convey the quality attributes of of the PAMPAT project (French abbreviation: the labelled GI figs to the consumers, the Market access facilitation project for typical PAMPAT project has worked with local agrofood products – Tunisia). UNIDO has producers and the GIFRUITS to set-up a also worked with the Tunisian Ministry of public-private promotion programme. Every Agriculture and the Interprofessional Group year several tasting events are organized in of Fruits GIFRUITS to set-up a third-party different Tunisian supermarket chains to control system for the GI figs. The figs of bring the unique features of the GI fig closer Djebba have to pass the yearly audits that to the clients. Participations of fig producers are carried out by a Tunisian certification at regional, national and international trade- body. In parallel, Djebba farmers have been fairs represent also an opportunity to inform assisted by UNIDO to set up a local associ- clients about the specificity of the Djebba ation in 2017 that is in charge by law of the fig. Furthermore, cooking events around the self-control system. The association distrib- GI fig have been organized in collaboration utes the GI stickers to the 143 GI farmers in with leading Tunisian gastronomy associa- Djebba that have signed the product specifi- tions both in the village of Djebba and in the cations as per legal requirements and keeps capital Tunis. Famous TV-cooks have created record of all the documentation necessary dishes using different ingredients such as fig to ensure traceability from the farm to the leaves, fresh figs or fig jam. Over the years market place. In 2019 already 25% of the targeted media and PR-work around the local production was certified with the GI as GI fig has allowed to increase considerably informed by the association. the renown of this flagship product. News

50 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

around the famous fig are taken up by all production facilities. Products from Djebba type of communication outlets such as TV, are experiencing a notable success on the radio, printed press and digital media. Today local market. Within a couple of years, prices Tunisian consumers are increasingly aware of of dried figs have increased by 50%. the immaterial cultural heritage behind the The GI Djebba fig has played a core role GI fruit. This special fig is not just a source of in making the mountain village increasingly pride for the local farmers, but is increasingly well-known among Tunisians. Between 2015 considered as a national flagship product. As and 2019 the number of visitors has more than a result, prices for the fig farmers in Djebba doubled. On the weekends local producers have doubled. During the production season, set up sales points close to the main tourist the GI fruits are sold in different retail chains attraction, the Djebba mountain, and offer all over Tunisia and are also exported to the their products and snacks to the visitors. Gulf countries and Canada. Furthermore, tourist groups can preorder In order to create additional revenues for thematic three courses meals around the local the inhabitants of Djebba, the PAMPAT project flagship product that are prepared by one of has also supported some local producers’ the women producers groups. These activi- groups to start offering and marketing local ties have allowed farmers’ families to increase products such as sun-dried figs, jams, tradi- their income. tional pastries and essential oils. A cooperative Driven by the success, the inhabitants of and two rural groupings have been estab- Djebba are now developing targeted activ- lished. These have been assisted to set-up new ities to further encourage alternative tour- production facilities that comply with legal ism. For instance, an increasing number of requirements and to purchase small equip- buildings in Djebba are having their doors and ments and production tools. Furthermore, windows painted in lila, the colour of the fig, coaching sessions have been organized to to make the village more attractive for visi- standardize new processing techniques and to tors. Furthermore, road signalling around the organize the production chain. The PAMPAT flagship product is being slowly expanded. project has also offered support to create The PAMPAT project has partnered up with innovative packaging and logistics solutions local authorities and the Tunisian Tourism and to incorporate modern marketing and Board to integrate Djebba in tourist circuits. sales techniques. Trainings on management, To this end, discovery “GI fig-tours” for travel strategic planning, accounting and taxation agency staff have already been organized. were also organized to ensure the smooth Furthermore, support has been provided to daily working of the new producers’ networks. set-up the annual GI Djebba fig festival that Local products are mainly sold to the end-con- will be organized in 2020 for the fourth time. sumers in regional markets, gourmet shops, Moreover, Djebba has recently applied online boutiques and supermarkets; the origin to receive the status of “Globally Important of these products is hereby used as the unique Agricultural Heritage System” (GIAHM) selling point. Furthermore, with the support by the UN-Agency FAO. The inhabitants of the PAMPAT project, a producers’ cooper- of Djebba wish to continue their efforts of ative has set-up the first shop for local prod- protecting and promoting their traditional ucts in the village of Djebba. The sales point is farming practices, while on the same time located close to Djebba’s mountain, the main creating new sources of income thanks to the natural site, and within the cooperative’s renown of the GI fig.

Video: www.youtube.com/watch?v=PESm6MvcCxg Website: www.aoc-figuedjebba.com

51 LOCAL FOOD FOR LOCAL MARKETS

List of Boxes

BOX1 FARM SHOP (COSTA RICA) BOX2 PICK-YOUR-OWN (CROATIA AND BRAZIL) BOX3 AGRITOURISM (ALBANIA AND BRAZIL) BOX3 FARMERS’ MARKET (LATVIA) BOX4 FARMERS’ MARKETS NETWORKS BOX5 LOCAL FOOD SHOP (HUNGARY AND FRANCE) BOX6 BOX SCHEME (SOUTH AFRICA) BOX 7 FOOD COOP (ITALY) BOX 8 COMMUNITY SUPPORTED AGRICULTURE (USA) BOX9 MUNICIPAL CATERING OF KIURUVESI (FINLAND) BOX 10 ZERO KILOMETER RESTAURANT (ITALY) BOX11 PRICE MANAGEMENT AT FARMERS’ MARKET (ITALY) BOX 12 COMMERCIAL FOOD-HUBS (HUNGARY) BOX13 FARMERS OWNED FOOD-HUBS (USA) BOX 14 SFSC LABELLING IN LOCAL RESTAURANTS (ITALY)

52 UNITED NATIONS INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION Department of Trade, Investment and Innovation (TII) Vienna International Centre, P.O. Box 300, 1400 Vienna, Austria E-mail: [email protected], Internet: www.unido.org