37 research outputs found
Water footprint of food quality schemes
Water Footprint (WF, henceforth) is an indicator of water consumption and has taken ground to assess the impact of agricultural production processes over freshwater. The focus of this study was contrasting non-conventional, certified products with identical products obtained through conventional production schemes (REF, henceforth) using WF as a measure of their pressure on water resources. The aim was to the show whether products that are certified as Food Quality Schemes (FQS, henceforth) could also incorporate the lower impact on water among their quality features. To perform this comparison, we analysed 23 products selected among Organic, PDO and PGI as FQS, and their conventional counterparts. By restricting the domain of analysis to the on-farm phase of the production chain, we obtained that that no significant differences emerged between the FQS and REF products. However, if the impact is measured per unit area rather than per unit product, FQS showed a significant reduction in water demand.Objectius de Desenvolupament Sostenible::12 - ProducciĂł i Consum ResponsablesPostprint (published version
Do food quality schemes and net price premiums go together?
This article addresses the issue of the profitability of Food Quality Scheme (FQS) products as compared to reference products, which are defined as analogous products without quality label. We approach this question by taking into account the level of the value chain (upstream, processing, and downstream), the sector (vegetal, animal, seafood) and the type of FQS (PGI, PDO, Organic). We collected original data for several products produced in selected European countries, as well as in Thailand and Vietnam. Comparisons depending on value chain level, sector and FQS are possible by using two comparable indicators: price premium and net price premium (including cost differential). The following principal conclusions were reached: 1) Price is higher for FQS products than for the reference products, regardless of the production level, the type of FQS or the sector; 2) Price premiums generated by FQS do not differ along the value chain, nor between sectors (vegetal, animal or seafood/fish); 3) Price premium for organic products is significantly higher than for PGI products, and this conclusion holds at upstream and processing levels, taking into account the costs directly related to production; 4) All organic products and almost all PDO and PGI products analysed benefit from a positive quality rent; 5) At upstream level and processing level, the relative weight of intermediate consumption in the cost structure is lower for organic products than for reference products.Objectius de Desenvolupament Sostenible::12 - ProducciĂł i Consum ResponsablesPostprint (published version
Economic spill-over of food quality schemes on their territory
We study the effect of a set of food quality scheme (FQS) products within the local economy using a local multiplier approach based on LM3 methodology. To evaluate the effective contribution within the local area, we compare each FQS product with its equivalent standard/conventional counterpart. Local multiplier allows us to track the financial flows converging within the local area at the different levels of the supply chain so that we can measure the FQS product role in local economic activation. Overall, the FQS products exhibit a higher positive contribution to the local economy than the standard references. However, there is significant heterogeneity in the impact according to the product categories. In the case of vegetal products, the local economic advantage due to FQS is 7% higher than the reference products, but the statistical tests reject the null hypothesis that the medians are significantly different from zero. On the contrary, animal products exhibit a larger contribution of FQS than the standard counterparts (+24%). The PGI products (+25%) produce the major effect, while PDO products show a median difference lower (+6%). The organic and non-organic products seem to be substantially equivalent in terms of contribution to the local economy, due to the similarity in the downstream processing phase.Objectius de Desenvolupament Sostenible::12 - ProducciĂł i Consum ResponsablesPostprint (updated version
Are certified supply chains more socially sustainable? A bargaining power analysis
Food quality schemes (FQS: organic and geographical indication products) are often supposed to be more sustainable by their political advocates. We explore the social sustainability advantage of FQS through the lens of supply chainsâ bargaining power (BP) distribution. We propose an indicator synthesizing different sources underlying BP (competition-based, transactional, institutional) and counting two dimensions (fair BP distribution and adaptation capacity), that we apply to 18 FQS supply chains and corresponding reference. FQS perform better than their reference products on both dimensions. This better performance is due to a combination of sources.Objectius de Desenvolupament Sostenible::12 - ProducciĂł i Consum ResponsablesPostprint (published version
Sustainability performance of certified and non-certified food social and economic history
Related data set âSustainability performance of certified and non-certified foodâ with doi www.doi.org/10.15454/OP51SJ in repository âData inraeâThe dataset Sustainability performance of certified and non-certified food (https://www.doi.org/10.15454/OP51SJ) contains 25 indicators of economic, environmental, and social performance, estimated for 27 certified food value chains and their 27 conventional reference products. The indicators are estimated at different levels of the value chain: farm level, processing level, and retail level. It also contains the raw data based on which the indicators are estimated, its source, and the completed spreadsheet calculators for the following indicators: carbon footprint and food miles.Article signat per 14 autors/es
Valentin Bellassen, Filippo Arfini, Federico Antonioli, Antonio Bodini, Michael Boehm, RuĆŸica BreÄiÄ, Sara Chiussi, Peter Csillag, Michele Donati, Liesbeth Dries, Marion Drut, Matthieu Duboys de Labarre, Hugo Ferrer, Jelena FilipoviÄ, Lisa Gauvrit, JosĂ© M. Gil, Matthew Gorton, Viet HoĂ ng, Mohamed Hilal, Kamilla Knutsen Steinnes, Apichaya Lilavanichakul, Agata Malak-Rawlikowska, Edward Majewski, Sylvette Monier-Dilhan, Paul Muller, Orachos Napasintuwong, Kalliroi Nikolaou, Mai Nguyen, An Nguyá»
n Quỳnh, Ioannis Papadopoulos, Jack Peerlings, Aron Török, Thomas Poméon, Bojan Ristic, Burkhard Schaer, Zaklina Stojanovic, Barbara Tocco, Marina Tomic Maksan, Mario Veneziani, and Gunnar VittersoPostprint (published version
Les (nouvelles) ruralités en débat : une étude prospective de l'INRA et quelques controverses
International audienceEn janvier 2006 dĂ©butait Ă lâINRA lâĂ©tude prospective Nouvelles ruralitĂ©s qui visait Ă Ă©tudier les Ă©volutions possibles des ruralitĂ©s Ă lâhorizon 2030. Les rĂ©sultats de ces travaux ont Ă©tĂ© rendu publics lors dâun colloque en juillet 2008. Ils ont par la suite Ă©tĂ© mis en discussion dans diverses institutions pendant prĂšs dâun an en 2008 et en 2009. Ce texte fait retour sur la rĂ©ception des rĂ©sultats et sur les dĂ©bats qui ont pris forme autour de cette Ă©tude dans les diffĂ©rentes enceintes oĂč elle a Ă©tĂ© prĂ©sentĂ©e. AprĂšs une prĂ©sentation gĂ©nĂ©rale des principaux rĂ©sultats de lâexercice, cet article insiste sur la diversitĂ© des acteurs nationaux et territoriaux et des contextes institutionnels dans laquelle la prospective sâest trouvĂ© engagĂ©e. Nous reviendrons sur la maniĂšre dont cette Ă©tude a fait sens pour les praticiens et sur les retours dâexpĂ©rience auxquels elle a donnĂ© lieu, ainsi que sur les controverses actuelles quâelle a permis dâidentiïŹer
Les (nouvelles) ruralités en débat : une étude prospective de l'INRA et quelques controverses
International audienceEn janvier 2006 dĂ©butait Ă lâINRA lâĂ©tude prospective Nouvelles ruralitĂ©s qui visait Ă Ă©tudier les Ă©volutions possibles des ruralitĂ©s Ă lâhorizon 2030. Les rĂ©sultats de ces travaux ont Ă©tĂ© rendu publics lors dâun colloque en juillet 2008. Ils ont par la suite Ă©tĂ© mis en discussion dans diverses institutions pendant prĂšs dâun an en 2008 et en 2009. Ce texte fait retour sur la rĂ©ception des rĂ©sultats et sur les dĂ©bats qui ont pris forme autour de cette Ă©tude dans les diffĂ©rentes enceintes oĂč elle a Ă©tĂ© prĂ©sentĂ©e. AprĂšs une prĂ©sentation gĂ©nĂ©rale des principaux rĂ©sultats de lâexercice, cet article insiste sur la diversitĂ© des acteurs nationaux et territoriaux et des contextes institutionnels dans laquelle la prospective sâest trouvĂ© engagĂ©e. Nous reviendrons sur la maniĂšre dont cette Ă©tude a fait sens pour les praticiens et sur les retours dâexpĂ©rience auxquels elle a donnĂ© lieu, ainsi que sur les controverses actuelles quâelle a permis dâidentiïŹer
Les usages non-alimentaires de la biomasse végétale à l'horizon 2050. Résumé de la prospective
Atelier de Réflexion Prospective VegA : Quels végétaux et systÚmes de production durables pour satisfaire les besoins en bioénergie, synthons et biomatériaux
Les usages non-alimentaires de la biomasse végétale à l'horizon 2050. Rapport de la prospective
Atelier de Réflexion Prospective VegA : Quels végétaux et systÚmes de production durables pour satisfaire les besoins en bioénergie, synthons et biomatériaux