Sense and Non-Sense of Local–Global Food Chain Comparison, Empirical Evidence from Dutch and Italian Pork Case Studies

Henk Oostindie,Davide Menozzi,Eric Hees,Filippo Arfini,Rudolf Van Broekhuizen,Giovanni Belletti,Kees De Roest

doi:10.3390/su8040319

Abstract

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

Highlights

Rural and food sciences know a vivid debate around the distinctiveness, performances and prospects of agri-food initiatives, encompassing notions as alternative food networks, short food chains and local food systems [1,2,3,4,5]
It is increasingly accepted that this does not allow for simple dichotomies in terms of local versus global or conventional versus alternative
Our analysis focus mainly on economic resilience, making specific reference to the capacity of the pig chains to front price volatility and increasing power unbalances due to the emergence of “big player” in animal feed markets and in the retail phase

Summary

Introduction

Rural and food sciences know a vivid debate around the distinctiveness, performances and prospects of agri-food initiatives, encompassing notions as alternative food networks, short food chains and local food systems [1,2,3,4,5]. It is increasingly accepted that this does not allow for simple dichotomies in terms of local versus global or conventional versus alternative These dichotomies turn out to be less fruitful for a thorough and adequate understanding of ongoing processes of change in food production and consumption patterns. Others take intermediary positions by underlining that food chain “hybrids”, interfaces between conventional and alternative food markets, are difficult to assess in terms of their potential contribution to rural development [17], or make a distinction between multiple transition pathways towards sustainable food production and consumption patterns, as part of socio-technical network constellations that embody specific promises, expectations and limitations [18]

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion