Measuring the Economic, Environmental, and Social Sustainability of Short Food Supply Chains

Abstract

The production and distribution of food are among the hot topics debated in the context of sustainable development. Short food supply chains (SFSCs) are now widely believed to be more sustainable in comparison to mass food delivery systems. To date, very little quantitative evidence exists on the impacts of various types of food supply chains. Using a cross-sectional quantitative approach, this study assesses the sustainability of distribution channels in short and long food supply chains based on 208 food producers across seven countries: France, Hungary, Italy, Norway, Poland, the United Kingdom, and Vietnam. Ten distribution channel types are used in this study. To provide a comprehensive sustainability assessment, a set of economic, social, and environmental indicators are applied. Indicators commonly used in the literature are used, supported by original indicators constructed specifically for the present study. In total, 486 chains are examined and the study confirms that individual producers participate simultaneously in several, short and long chains. Participation in SFSCs is beneficial for producers from an economic perspective. SFSCs allow producers to capture a large proportion of margin otherwise absorbed by different intermediaries. It appears, however, that ’longer’ supply channels generate lower environmental impacts per unit of production when measured in terms of food miles and carbon footprint. Finally, ambiguous results are found regarding social dimension, with significant differences across types of chains.

Short Food Supply Chains and Their Contributions to Sustainability: Participants’ Views and Perceptions from 12 European Cases

“…Both these markets are centrally located in relatively large cities, and in Dijon as much as 48 percent stated that they came on foot or by bicycle. These findings resonate with previous studies on SFSCs [19] as well as the quantitative assessments of SFSCs within the Strength2Food project [33].…”

“…From the interviews with producers and retailers, we found few negative expressions towards cooperation and competition between producers or between producers and retailers, rather the positive aspects were emphasised. These findings are in line with the results of the quantitative producer survey in the Strength2Food project [33], where the SFSCs overall scored higher than "long chains" on perceived bargaining-and market power (the indicator included factors such as influence, trust, relations with other producers and consumers) as well as general satisfaction with participation in the chain ("I like it"). As mentioned, the critique from the producers was directed towards competition from other actors, such as larger retailers.…”

“…The economic sustainability of SFSCs is, according to the producers, valued as beneficial when taking into account premium prices and bargaining power (the autonomy in price setting). This is also confirmed in a quantitative study of SFSC within the Strength2Food project [33]. The perception of prices as fair is often shared among producers and consumers, but not in all instances.…”

“…Here, the main competition was perceived as coming from the larger retailers. These organising principles of autonomy on the one hand and cooperation in close networks on the other were appreciated and regarded as distinctively different from the conventional food system with its hierarchical structure, which, as we will come back to later, is often experienced as a disadvantage to the producer, especially regarding price [33].…”

“…However, following Malak-Rawlikowska et al, this picture is not straightforward. Several producers also emphasised that hypermarket chains are trustful business partners that opens for sale of larger quantities of products to reasonable prices [33]. The benefits of large-scale retail were also emphasised by one of the organic producers in the Norwegian Consumer cooperative.…”