The Multiplier Effects of Food Relocalization: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Background: The purchase of local food is often argued to stimulate local economies through multiplier effects; this argument is questioned in this paper. Methods: The ScienceDirect, Wiley Online Library, Taylor and Francis Online, SpringerLink, AgECON, and Emerald databases were searched systematically. A complementary search in Google Scholar was also carried out. Peer-reviewed studies published between 2000 and 2019 were identified using multiple search terms. Data about four types of multipliers (output, employment, income, and value-added multipliers) were extracted. Results: Twenty-four papers fit the criteria, allowing for a qualitative assessment only. Sixteen papers found unambiguously that an increase in demand for local food had a directly positive impact on local economies in some way; one paper found no impact at all. The papers were classified into three groups based on their focal areas: marketing channel-focused, farm enterprise-focused, and scenario/impact analysis-focused studies. In terms of the methods of analysis, three major approaches were identified: input–output models, assessments of descriptive statistics, and econometric analyses. Considerations related to the potential overestimation of current approaches are presented. Conclusions: The existence of employment and income multipliers seems to be more evident, while the impacts of output- and value-added multipliers depend more on the actual context. Research gaps are also identified.

Examining the Role of Local Products in Rural Development in the Light of Consumer Preferences—Results of a Consumer Survey from Hungary

“…Benedek et al [30] examined the possible multiplier effects of local products in the local economy. The results show that employment-and income multipliers can be considered more evident, but outputand value-added multipliers were more situation-dependent.…”

Sustainability assessment of short food supply chains (SFSC): developing and testing a rapid assessment tool in one African and three European city regions

“…Similar results were presented in the empirical study of Mundler and Laughrea ( 2016 ), which found mainly positive (farmers’ welfare, local development, welfare of the community and environmental protection) or neutral effects (economic role of SFSC in local economy, the access to fresh and healthy food). The socio-economic benefits and shortcomings for the producers were, for example, studied by Schmutz et al ( 2017 ), Opitz et al ( 2019 ) Benedek et al ( 2020 ) and Malak-Rawlikowska ( 2019 ). The latter study reveals a slight preference for SFSC (in general) and against long chains according to the better prices, and regular and assured payments (economic stability), but also certain shortcomings of specific SFSC types, such as pick-your-own and internet sales, due to small quantities and the occasional character of these purchases.…”

“…Another difficulty in this research field results from the limited access to qualitative and quantitative data of the benefits of SFSC (Mundler and Laughrea 2016 ) and a lack of baseline and longitudinal data (Kneafsey et al 2013 ). Concerning the impacts of the agri-food sector and especially of local food systems (including SFSCs), it becomes obvious that the relevance and sufficiency of impacts were sometimes overestimated and possible counter-effects or trade-offs were neglected (Michel-Villarreal et al 2019 ; Benedek et al 2020 ).…”

Development of the Concept of Circular Supply Chain Management—A Systematic Review

“…However, as in the case of global world economic phenomena, it is not possible to speak about only the positive aspects of localization. The complexity of the issue is discussed by Benedek et al (2020) [12] with regard to the food industry and by Németh et al (2020) [13] concerning locally produced energy. European and global businesses are increasingly moving towards sustainable value chains.…”