Estado de Desarrollo de las empresas estudiadas según el estudio de Chandler

ØSTERGÅRD1,THOMAS NEMECEK2,MORTEN GYLLING3

Department of Chemical and Biochemical Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Denmark, www.bioeng.kt.dtu.dk iences, Zurich, Switzerland, www.agroscope.ch, [email protected] http://www.ifro.ku.dk/english/, [email protected]

Life cycle assessment, emergy assessment, micro-economic analysis, case farms, participatory innovation, renewability

Sustainability assessments of food supply systems have to identify hotspots for reducing use of non-renewable resources and potentials for substitution of these with renewable resources as well as hotspots for reducing emissions to the environment. We have used a

based on LCA, emergy and economy to evaluate central phenomena in innovative food supply systems based on interviews and statistical data. The indicators chosen point to where systems need to be changed to better support a sustainable development according to SOLIBAM

ovative farms and food supply systems studied in different countries.Background

Current agricultural practice is under pressure and there is a need to develop and implement new practices with a high degree

In SOLIBAM we focus on organic and low-input practices. A central concept for food supply systems is that they should support a sustainable development. Strictly speaking this would imply that we 1) use resources at a rate that allows their re

waste at a rate which allows the environment to absorb it. Sustainable development, therefore, implies making use of renewabl

extent. Thus a sustainability assessment has to identify hotspots for reducing use of non-renewable resources and potentials for substitution of these with renewable resources. Further, it should address the production of wastes and the potentials for using them as resources

If the environmental impacts of food systems are to be significantly reduced, then it is necessary to view the production and distribution of food together. Direct marketing and local selling of products offers a way for farms to by-pass the energy intensive mass distribution system. The development in food

upply systems has resulted in a push towards producers being more specialized and production in larger, uniform units. These

reductions in crop diversity at the farm level which in the long run may cause problems for our society. For example, the biodiversity loss associated with these systems has been shown to result in decreased productivity and stability of ecosystems due to loss of ecosystem service

Specifically, biodiversity at the farm level has been shown often to have many ecological benefits (ecosystem services) like supporting pollination, pest and disease control. A driving force for increasing on-farm biodiversity has been shown to be local selling in a Swedish study (Bjørklund et al., 2009).

(Life Cycle Assessment) as well as emergy assessment provide tools for such analyses. Emergy is defined as the total availabl

indirectly required to make a given product or service and is measured in solar equivalent Joules (seJ). The two methodologies are to a large extent based on the same type of inventory of energy and material flows, but rely on different theories of values and system boundar

boundaries around the studied system as supported by human dominated processes (resource extraction, refining, transportation etc.) whereas emergy accounting considers systems as embedded in the larger natural system and thus also includes all direct and indirect flows of

d geothermal heat. Another difference is that emergy accounting includes labour in order to take into account the indirect resources from society, e.g. infrastructure, needed to support a system. LCA on the other hand considers emissions to the env

resources. However, the emergy method lacks some of the standardization and robustness of LCA. In SOLIBAM we have combined th both methods. Further, we have included economic analyses to understand better the outcomes of innovative food supply systems. Combining different assessment tools is a requirement for addressing the complexity of today’s society to end up with a more

of each system as well as a discussion of how to progress towards systems applying the SOLIBAM strategies, i.e., innovative sustainable strategies where products and processes for the food supply system are based on PPBM and diversity at all levels. The purpose is to lear

ased on interviews and statistical data and to point out the complexities of these systems which make each of them unique. The indicators chosen should be able to point to where the systems need to be changed to better fulfil t

rking according to the SOLIBAM strategies. New tools have been developed and combined with well-known tools to perform this task.

In SOLIBAM we have considered eight cases of a food supply system, mainly based on innovative farms aiming at reducing inputs and applying large diversity of crops and varieties and thus being candidates for stepping stones towards SOLIBAM strategies. We designate these

paradigmatic cases since they represent a fundamentally different way of producing and distributing food compared to the dominating practices which are conventional agricultural production and supermarket mass distribution of the produce.

We analyse the environmental impacts, the resource use efficiency and the economic feasibility of these cases. We have benchmarked them against ‘normal practice’ as well as made scenarios for how to increase their contribution to a sustainable development of the Europe

We define a food supply system as consisting of the production at the farm, processing and distribution to the customer. Our cases are defined based on the main output from the farms considered as either vegetable systems or bread systems:

SOLIBAM Presentation

Sustainable food supply systems from diversity

Integrated assessment of environmental and economic

www.bioeng.kt.dtu.dk, [email protected] , [email protected] economic analysis, case farms, participatory innovation, renewability

renewable resources and potentials for substitution of these with renewable resources as well as hotspots for reducing emissions to the environment. We have used a number of indicators l phenomena in innovative food supply systems based on interviews and statistical data. The indicators chosen point to where systems need to be changed to better support a sustainable development according to SOLIBAM strategies. Examples

Current agricultural practice is under pressure and there is a need to develop and implement new practices with a high degree of renewability and input practices. A central concept for food supply systems is that they should support a sustainable development. Strictly speaking this would imply that we 1) use resources at a rate that allows their re-formation and 2) produces waste at a rate which allows the environment to absorb it. Sustainable development, therefore, implies making use of renewable resources to a larger ewable resources and potentials for substitution of these with renewable resources. Further, it should address the production of wastes and the potentials for using them as resources within the system.

significantly reduced, then it is necessary to view the production and distribution of food together. pass the energy intensive mass distribution system. The development in food upply systems has resulted in a push towards producers being more specialized and production in larger, uniform units. These changes tend to imply example, the biodiversity loss associated with these systems has been shown to result in decreased productivity and stability of ecosystems due to loss of ecosystem services (Cardinale et al., 2012). own often to have many ecological benefits (ecosystem services) like supporting pollination, pest farm biodiversity has been shown to be local selling in a Swedish study (Bjørklund et al., 2009). (Life Cycle Assessment) as well as emergy assessment provide tools for such analyses. Emergy is defined as the total available energy directly or

wo methodologies are to a large extent based on the same type of inventory of energy and material flows, but rely on different theories of values and system boundaries. LCA draws system rocesses (resource extraction, refining, transportation etc.) whereas emergy accounting considers systems as embedded in the larger natural system and thus also includes all direct and indirect flows of freely available resources d geothermal heat. Another difference is that emergy accounting includes labour in order to take into account the indirect resources from society, e.g. infrastructure, needed to support a system. LCA on the other hand considers emissions to the environment in addition to resources. However, the emergy method lacks some of the standardization and robustness of LCA. In SOLIBAM we have combined the advantages of

vative food supply systems.

Combining different assessment tools is a requirement for addressing the complexity of today’s society to end up with a more comprehensive description lying the SOLIBAM strategies, i.e., innovative sustainable strategies where products and processes for the food supply system are based on PPBM and diversity at all levels. The purpose is to learn about central ased on interviews and statistical data and to point out the complexities of these systems which make each of them unique. The indicators chosen should be able to point to where the systems need to be changed to better fulfil the expectations to systems

known tools to perform this task.

rms aiming at reducing inputs and applying large diversity of crops and varieties and thus being candidates for stepping stones towards SOLIBAM strategies. We designate these systems as of producing and distributing food compared to the dominating practices which sibility of these cases. We have benchmarked them against ‘normal practice’ as well as made scenarios for how to increase their contribution to a sustainable development of the European agriculture.

137

1. Vegetable systems: two farms in UK, one in Italy and one in Portugal 2. Grain and bread systems: two farms in France, one in Italy and one in Portugal

Some farms also have animals. Further, the farms can be classified into their degree of input as well as their scale (farm area compared to average national farm size). Also, the crop diversity differs between the farms. Finally, each food supply distribution system is either direct to consumers or indirect via supermarket. The selected cases also include different stages of establishing low input farms.

The study was mainly based on primary data representing the actual situation in 2008, 2009 and 2010. Data were collected directly from 8 producers through direct semi-structured interviews on farm and further contact via post, e-mails and telephone.

Selected indicators for integrated assessment

Data consist of inputs and emissions from total annual food production at farm gate and of food provision at consumers door or table. The indicators chosen are:

• Extended eco-efficiency = ‘impact’/’functional unit’

impact = global warming potential, non-renewable energy use, eutrophication, acidification, ecotoxicity, emergy use, emergy footprint, revenue, costs, etc

functional unit = 1 kg bread, food energy in total production of vegetables, 1 EUR, 1 hectare, 1 seJ (solar equivalent Joule), etc

• Origin of inputs

% renewable inputs at different scales

% inputs from farm, from local community, and globally Example of integrated results from two French systems

FR1 is a well-established organic farm of more than 70 ha that besides from its cereals and flour production also produces and distributes milk and a variety of cheeses. It cultivates more than 300 varieties, of which more than 100 are grown each year. FR2 is a 10 years young farm of only 5 ha. The main product for the farm is own produced bread, based on grain grown and milled on the farm. The bread is also distributed by the farm. A large variability of eco-efficiency calculated in different ways was found between farms and even among the years 2008-2010 within individual farms. This highlights the importance of individual management decisions.

The application of integrative design with LCA for the two case study systems from France have shown i) that a low-input and diverse cropping system can be relatively eco-efficient calculated as emissions per kg bread produced with a proper organisation, ii) that it is possible to improve eco-efficiency of such systems without compromising their distinctive properties like local production and diversity and iii) that large improvement potentials suggest that a lack of knowledge on eco-efficient cropping system management can be a key limiting factor for environmental sustainability (Kulak et al, this congress). The origin of inputs were analysed by emergy assessment. Energy and material flows from the local area represented 64-71% of total resource use, and that about 20-27% of the total resource use was renewable (Fig 2). This indicated a high level of interaction with the local environment but also a large amount of non-renewable resources coming from society (Wright et al, this congress).

Economic analysis showed that the analysed food supply systems were socio-economic sustainable in the sense that they were able to tackle changes in the external economic environment such as the economic crisis and shifting consumer behavior, selling products at premium prices, and enhancing the economic performance at system level. (Tavella and Gylling, this congress).

Example of integrated results from UK food supply system

We have evaluated the advantages and disadvantages of a paradigmatic case, UK1, which is a small-scale low-input organic vegetable farm in UK with high crop diversity and a related box scheme food supply system. By combining emergy evaluation and life cycle assessment (LCA), we have benchmarked the resource use and environmental impacts from UK1 against two modelled organic systems, UK2Low and UK2High (Markussen et al 2014). The UK2-systems produce the same amount of vegetables (accounted for in terms of food energy) as UK1, however, they have a much reduced crop diversity and either low or high inputs and yields. Together they represent a range of standard practices for organic vegetable production. In addition, the UK2-systems are embedded in a supermarket-led mass distribution food supply system. The UK1 distribution system is at least three times as resource efficient as UK2 when assessed by emergy analysis. The results of the LCA for the cultivation phase were less conclusive as the case had neither consistently more nor consistently less environmental impacts compared to the model systems. However, for the distribution phase, both the emergy assessment and LCA evaluated the case to perform substantially better than model systems. However, UK1 uses still very many services from the society (89% of emergy flow).

We have compared the economic performance of UK1 for 2008, 2009 and 2010, and explained how the farm developed economically within these three years in order to adapt to external changes and enhance socioeconomic sustainability. Based on this analysis, we have argued that UK1 needs to continuously cultivate different crops, diversify its distribution strategies, create different tasks to carry out at the farm, and generate income and year round work for full-time employees in order to enhance its socio-economic sustainability. To this end we have illustrated a future strategy implying a delivery of vegetables (additional 20% of bag sales) to a restaurant. This strategy has shown that delivering vegetables to a restaurant leads to a decrease of labour costs (due to reduced requirements for packaging) and an increase in annual total return. This increase will contribute to enhancing the socioeconomic sustainability of UK1. (Tavella and Gylling, this congress)

The indicators chosen have demonstrated that even for innovative farms and food supply systems there are large potentials for improvement of environmental sustainability, resource use and economic outcome.

Acknowledgement

Data collection by Michal Kulak, Mads Markussen, Carolina Passeira, Livia Ortolani in collaboration with the farmers and local SOLIBAM researchers are acknowledged as well as the support by EU.

References

Bjorklund, J.; Westberg, L.; Geber, U.; Milestad, R.; Ahnstrom, J. 2009. Local Selling as a Driving Force for Increased on-Farm Biodiversity. J. Sustain. Agr., 33, 885–902. Cardinale, B.J.; Duffy, J.E.; Gonzalez, A.; Hooper, D.U.; Perrings, C.; Venail, P.; Narwani, A.; Mace, G.M.; Tilman, D.; Wardle, D.A.; et al. , 2012. Biodiversity Loss and its

Impact on Humanity. Nature 486, 59–67.

Kulak M. Nemecek T, Østergård H, Frossard E and Gaillard G. (This congress) Integrative design. Resolving the conflict between diversity and efficiency.

Markussen, MV., Kulak, M., Smith, LG., Nemecek, T. and Østergård, H., 2014. Evaluating the Sustainability of a Small-Scale Low-Input Organic Vegetable Supply System in the United Kingdom.Sustainability, 6: 1913-1945

Tavella E and Gylling M.(This congress) Economic sustainability of SOLIBAM food supply systems. A comparative analysis

139

Session D Oral presentation