Upload
noreen-kelley
View
213
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Perspectives on the Solidarity Economy in Marche, Italy: hypothesis on the role of
agriculture and food consumption
Authors:
Matteo Belletti The Polytechnic University of Marche
Lucia ManciniEuropean Commission (JRC, Ispra)
WG3 - Exploring “civic food networks” and their role in enabling sustainable urban food systems. Session 4, Tuesday 3th of April, 2012
Agriculture in an Urbanizing SocietyInternational Conference on Multifunctional Agriculture and Urban-Rural Relations
The Netherlands | 1 - 4 April 2012
“Loneliness is for the spirit, what food is to the body.”
(Seneca)
Objectives
• Interpreting the food supply chain of the Italian “GAS” solidarity purchasing groups (Brunori et al., 2012) ...– The food economy within GAS experience – Food quality differentiation within GAS– Environmental impact of food purchased through GAS– Key elements emerging from GAS practice
• ... within a wider context of “change” focussing on a process of cooperation among Universities and Civil Society– The active role of University in supporting the process– The strategy– Planning
4
Methodology • Exploratory structure aimed at investigating the three basic
elements constituting the “GAS food supply chain”:– GAS, as food retailer– Supply, farmers delivering GASs– Demand, GAS Household Members (GHM)
• Data collection– Face to face quanti-qualitative interviews to a quota-sample of:
• 20 GASs• 182 GHMs• 20 farmers delivering GASs (in-depth interview too)
• Data analysis– GAS economic reading:
• GAS market behaviour: income statement on supply, PCA on demand
• GAS ecological assessment: Material Input per Service Unit (MIPS, Lettenmeier et al., 2009)
5
7
The GAS as food retailer
• GAS average size: – 70 households, – range min-max 12-190 households,– 50% of them (GASs) consisting of 33 to 95 households
• GAS household size: – Average family size approaching three members
• Household food expenditure through the GAS : – On average 130 Euros per month, accounting for ca. 20% of the
average food expenditure of Italian households (Istat, 2011).– 25% of the GHM interviewed said their food bill is 200 to 500
Euros per month– 53% of the GHM interviewed stated that the GAS is the main
channel for their food purchases.
8
Supply
• Farmer type A: having GAS as the main outlet;
• Farmer type B: providing only surpluses from his other market channels to GAS;
• Farmer type C: using GAS together with and complementarily to other SFSC (e.g. farm outlet for direct selling, direct selling to school refectories, etc.).
9
Demand
• Family replacement capacity of conventional distribution with GAS distribution:– The highest substitution capability of GAS in Marche, Italy
• pasta• rice • flours • other cereal derivatives• extra virgin olive oil • Honey• sugar • coffee, tea & other non-alcoholic beverages
The simultaneous growth in GAS purchasing of different product categories is related to products requiring little organisational capacity in terms of distribution and intermediaries: stockable no perishable products, requiring less frequent
restocking; ii) typical local products that are easily purchased in farms
found close to towns; and iii) products easily bought from fair trade outlets.
10
GASEcological assessment
Source: our elaboration
GAS Eco-efficiency: Negative with regard to
the GAS biotic dimension: mainly linked to the lower yields of agronomic organic practice and the substitution of chemical inputs with vegetal and animal biomass
Positive with regard to i) GAS abiotic dimension, ii) air, iii) water, elements mainly related to the avoidance of agrochemicals and shortening of the supply chain
Result (biotic+abiotic) = +10% eco-gain
Figure 1. The systems under investigation
12
Our own “Truman Show”
• Issue n.1 In which part of the film are we working?
- Truman’s awareness (bounded rationality)
• Issue n.2 Will our hero survive the storm in his small boat Santa
Maria?- Truman’s determination (impact on supply chain)
• Issue n.3 Will our hero choose to EXIT? - Truman’s freedom (willingness to pay for the change)
13
Christof’s control
• Issue n.1 The Italian agri-food market
• Agricultural income (figure 2)• Ecological statement
• Issue n.2The GAS market functioning• The hidden effect of competition on quality-price ratio
is a sensitive spread between supply and demand values (as show by figure 3)
• Issue n.3The price and quality relationship• Quality labels and certificates are among the most widely used methods
to compensate for information asymmetry in food markets. Nevertheless food safety (along with quality certification and environmental impact of production) remains a credence attribute (Poulton and Lyne, 2009).
14Source: our elaboration
SFSC “income generation”
Figure 2. Horticultural product-mix price and incidence of Family Farm Labour Opportunity Cost (FFLOC) on Average Total Cost
(ATC) in Marche, Italy (Euros per kilogram)
Remember Farmer type C
15
Figure 3. Price trend for wheat and pasta in Italy (€/Kg)
Conventional wheat
Source: ISMEA (2011)
Conventional wheat
Organic wheat
Conventional pasta
Organic pasta
The price and quality relationship
Nov-10Oct-10Sept-10
Remember Farmer type B
16
Towards the EXIT • Issue n.1
Prices• SFSC seems to be a necessary condition to face the ecological dimension
of agricultural sustainability issues but is not sufficient to solve the economic problems of farm households. As a result, Gas household members should shift their focus from the prices to price construction.
• Issue n.2Market organization • The GAS movement should veer towards a system of self-certification for
food, maybe at a regional level, based on taking into account two key elements of agri-food chain suitability in the short and in the long run. The first, at a strictly agronomical level, is the local climate and habitat. The second, at a wide ecological level, is the entire agri-food supply chain structure, highlighting the crucial role of agricultural inputs.
• Issue n.3 Quality
• It can be argued that competitive market behaviour and ecological balance are two key elements regarding which GAS should not rely on labels as a guarantee of differentiation, and this is true the more extensive the area in which the label works (as EU organic farming).