Responsible Partner: INRA, UniPr
Authors: V. Bellassen, F. Arfini, F. Antonioli, A. Bodini, M. Boehm, R. Brečić, S. Chiussi, P. Csillag, M. Donati, L. Dries, M. Drut, M. Duboys de Labarre, H. Ferrer, J. Filipović, L. Gauvrit, C. Gil, M. Gorton, V. Hoàng, M. Hilal, K. Knutsen Steinnes, G. Leedon, A. Lilavanichakul, A. Malak-Rawlikowska, E. Majewski, S. Monier-Dilhan, P. Muller, O. Napasintuwong, K. Nikolaou, M. Nguyen, A. Nguyễn Quỳnh, I. Papadopoulos, S. Pascucci, T. Poméon, J. Peerlings, B. Ristic, B. Schaer, Z. Stojanovic, M. Tomic Maksan, Á. Török, M. Veneziani, G. Vitterso, A. Wilkinson.
Date of Publication: February 2019
This report presents a cross-comparison of the economic, environmental and social sustainability performance of food quality schemes (FQS) along 23 performance indicators (Table 1). The economic indicators cover prices, gross operating margins, exports and local spill-overs. The environmental indicators include carbon footprint, food miles, water use and water pollution. The social indicators cover employment, social capital, bargaining power distribution, generational balance and gender equity. The fields in which FQSs perform better or worse than conventional reference products are presented and discussed. The possible drivers of these differences in performance are discussed, including technical specifications, governance and terroir.
Table 1. Median relative difference in performance between FQSs and their conventional reference products
