One of the key challenges in improving our understanding of farmers' relations with input suppliers is that we do not have direct information about farmers' bargaining power vis-à-vis their input providers. To overcome this problem, this study used farmers' self-reported assessments of their position in the supply chain. Using unique micro-survey data from the dairy sector in Poland, we constructed a proxy of farmers' bargaining power and showed that it helps to explain discounts at which farmers buy feed from input suppliers, in addition to what is explained by the standard variables.
Farmers operate in a changing market, policy and social environment so questions arise as to how they experience these changes and react in their business orientation. This topic was examined in the period 2011 to 2016 in a strongly fluctuating product market and food policy environment, e.g., abolition of milk quotas in Europe. The study was based on unique panel data for 290 dairy farms in Poland, Slovenia, Lithuania and The Netherlands, questioned up to three times in 2011, 2013 and 2016. The conceptual framework was composed of Farmer goals, Resources, Opportunities and Threats (O&T), and Future expectations (performance) as continuous variables, and countries and strategy farmer groups as categorical variables. Data were analysed applying PCA, ANOVA, cluster and regression analyses. Dairy farmers seemed not to be motivated or educated to take strategic decisions that made the best use of their resources and to take opportunities and mitigate threats to achieve their personal goals. Farmer perceptions were strongly affected by country of origin, local environment and milk price, and less by the strategy group. The market situation is one of the dominant factors affecting the mind-set of farmers in Europe. Future expectations were evaluated highest in 2013 (period with 'high' prices), lowest in 2016 (price crisis) and intermediate in 2011 (moderate price period). The large dependence of farmers on the price of their product could be a sensitive issue for politicians, but also food chain members and farmers' syndicates. They may anticipate a fluctuating attitude of farmers with respect to organisational and institutional plans and implemented measures, depending on the market situation and related policy context.
Farmers operate in a changing market, policy and social environment so questions arise as to how they experience these changes and react in their business orientation. This topic was examined in the period 2011 to 2016 in a strongly fluctuating product market and food policy environment, e.g., abolition of milk quotas in Europe. The study was based on unique panel data for 290 dairy farms in Poland, Slovenia, Lithuania and The Netherlands, questioned up to three times in 2011, 2013 and 2016. The conceptual framework was composed of Farmer goals, Resources, Opportunities and Threats (O&T), and Future expectations (performance) as continuous variables, and countries and strategy farmer groups as categorical variables. Data were analysed applying PCA, ANOVA, cluster and regression analyses. Dairy farmers seemed not to be motivated or educated to take strategic decisions that made the best use of their resources and to take opportunities and mitigate threats to achieve their personal goals. Farmer perceptions were strongly affected by country of origin, local environment and milk price, and less by the strategy group. The market situation is one of the dominant factors affecting the mind-set of farmers in Europe. Future expectations were evaluated highest in 2013 (period with 'high' prices), lowest in 2016 (price crisis) and intermediate in 2011 (moderate price period). The large dependence of farmers on the price of their product could be a sensitive issue for politicians, but also food chain members and farmers' syndicates. They may anticipate a fluctuating attitude of farmers with respect to organisational and institutional plans and implemented measures, depending on the market situation and related policy context.
W opracowaniu przedstawiono wyniki badań dotyczące pomiaru wpływu krajobrazuwiejskiego, jego elementów i struktury na konkurencyjność regionu rozumianą jako zdolność do generowania relatywnie wysokich dochodów z działalności gospodarczej, przy jednoczesnym zapewnieniu zatrudnienia i dobrobytu społeczeństwa. Powiązania przyczynowe pomiędzy kształtowaniem krajobrazu, korzyściami społeczno-ekonomicznymi i mechanizmami wpływającymi na poziom dochodów zostały opisane i zmierzone na przykładzie regionu rolniczego, który znajduje się na terenie Parku Krajobrazowego im. Gen. Dezyderego Chłapowskiego w Wielkopolsce. W celu scharakteryzowania unikatowej struktury krajobrazu parku, za pomocą GIS, map glebowych i innych materiałów przygotowano szczegółowe mapy wybranego regionu i porównano je z dwoma obszarami rolniczymi o wyraźnie odmiennych cechach krajobrazowych, ale położonymi w sąsiedztwie. Na podstawie przygotowanych map dokonano inwentaryzacji krajobrazu i jego struktury. Stopień koncentracjii zróżnicowania elementów krajobrazu został zmierzony dwoma wskaźnikami – indeksem Shannona (H) i indeksem Herfindahla-Hirschmana (HHI). Następnie w celu określenia potencjalnego wpływukrajobrazu na konkurencyjność regionu opracowano koncepcję oceny zależności metodą Bayesian Belief Network (BBN). Opracowanie struktury BBN pozwoliło na ustalenie siły zależności pomiędzy poszczególnymi elementami krajobrazu, funkcjami pełnionymi przez krajobraz, korzyściami a konkurencyjnością regionu. Wyniki wskazują, że korzyści z krajobrazu dla konkurencyjności regionu w Parku Krajobrazowym im. Gen. Dezyderego Chłapowskiego są wyraźnie związane z rolnictwem chronionym przez pasy zadrzewień. Występowanie zadrzewień liniowych jest ponad dwukrotnie większe na terenie Parku niż w regionach sąsiednich. Krajobraz Parku waloryzowany jest z perspektywy dwóch najważniejszych pełnionych funkcji – produkcyjnej oraz regulacyjnej. Funkcja produkcyjna związanajest z rolniczym charakterem krajobrazu i produkcją żywności. Funkcja ochronno-regulacyjna wynika z występowania pasów zadrzewień śródpolnych, które w znaczący sposób redukują erozję wietrzną,na którą narażone są uprawy w tym regionie Polski. Stwierdzono też, że wszystkie rozważane elementy krajobrazu (pola uprawne, lasy, zadrzewienia śródpolne i przydrożne, zbiorniki wodne) mają pozytywny wpływ na zdolność do generowania dochodów w regionie, zwiększając szanse na osiągnięciewysokiej konkurencyjności, ale z różną siłą oddziaływania.
Improving the eco-efficiency of food systems is one of the major global challenges faced by the modern world. Short food supply chains (SFSCs) are commonly regarded to be less harmful to the environment, among various reasons, due to their organizational distribution and thus the shortened physical distance between primary producers and final consumers. In this paper, we empirically test this hypothesis, by assessing and comparing the environmental impacts of short and long food supply chains. Based on the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) approach, we calculate eco-efficiency indicators for nine types of food distribution chains. The analysis is performed on a sample of 428 short and long food supply chains from six European countries. Our results indicate that, on average, long food supply chains may generate less negative environmental impacts than short chains (in terms of fossil fuel energy consumption, pollution, and GHG emissions) per kg of a given product. The values of eco-efficiency indicators display a large variability across analyzed chains, and especially across different types of SFSCs. The analysis shows that the environmental impacts of the food distribution process are not only determined by the geographical distance between producer and consumer, but depend on numerous factors, including the supply chain infrastructure. ; This research received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program STRENGTH2FOOD under grant agreement no. 678024 and title: "Strengthening European Food Chain Sustainability by Quality and Procurement Policy". ; publishedVersion
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. ; This research has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program STRENGTH2FOOD under grant agreement no. 678024, and title: "Strengthening European Food Chain Sustainability by Quality and Procurement Policy". ; publishedVersion
International audience ; 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 chains' 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.
International audience ; 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 chains' 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.
International audience ; 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 chains' 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.
International audience ; Abstract The carbon and land footprint of 26 certified food products – geographical indications and organic products and their conventional references are assessed. This assessment goes beyond existing literature by (1) designing a calculation method fit for the comparison between certified food and conventional production, (2) using the same calculation method and parameters for 52 products – 26 Food Quality Schemes and their reference products – to allow for a meaningful comparison, (3) transparently documenting this calculation method and opening access to the detailed results and the underlying data, and (4) providing the first assessment of the carbon and land footprint of geographical indications. The method used is Life Cycle Assessment, largely relying on the Cool Farm Tool for the impact assessment. The most common indicator of climate impact, the carbon footprint expressed per ton of product, is not significantly different between certified foods and their reference products. The only exception to this pattern are vegetal organic products, whose carbon footprint is 16% lower. This is because the decrease in greenhouse gas emissions from the absence of mineral fertilizers is never fully offset by the associated lower yield. The climate impact of certified food per hectare is however 26% than their reference and their land footprint is logically 24% higher. Technical specifications directly or indirectly inducing a lower use of mineral fertilizers are a key driver of this pattern. So is yield, which depends both on terroir and farming practices. Overall, this assessment reinforces the quality policy of the European Union: promoting certified food is not inconsistent with mitigating climate change.
