A social network linking rural and peri-urban agricultural production to the city of Rome: A case study

Author/s Sabrina Giuca, Simonetta De Leo
Publishing Year 2019 Issue 2019/2 Language English
Pages 16 P. 507-522 File size 124 KB
DOI 10.3280/ECAG2019-002016
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

Many citizens, despite significant changes in the levels of awareness and responsibility towards environmental, ethical and social issues, remain ‘loyal’ to their lifestyles and their purchasing decisions. This is a phenomenon known as a value-action gap, which occurs when the values and intentions of an individual are not related to his actions. However, the individual characteristics of consumers can be ‘shaken’ by social and collective actions. Alternative Food Networks (AFNs), and among these the short supply chains, interpret different degrees of sustainability and aim to improve the coordination of supply and to involve consumers as active players in the local, typical and organic food system. An example is the ‘Kalulu’ network, on which this contribution focuses, a web platform which shortens the supply chain and transfers on a large scale the mechanism of Purchasing Group. The authors believe that this model, which operates in the rural and urban territory of the Metropolitan City of Rome, is able to bring well-being to the farm and the territory, on the one hand, and to bridge the value-action gap in individuals and families, on the other. Public support for this type of AFN - which develops networks of socio-economic relationships between producers and consumers and communicates the sharing of values - and the involvement of all local community stakeholders could generate a model of alternative governance of rural and peri-urban areas with typical products towards sustainable development. In fact, from the analysis carried out, it emerges that the platform creates a producer/consumer local market which recognizes a fair and sustainable exchange value, which goes beyond the price/quality ratio. In this commercialization model consumers increase their awareness and responsibility of consumption choices in respect of seasonality, traditions and natural organic cycles, reducing waste; while the constancy of purchasing and the reduction of intermediaries guarantee economic needs also for small farmers. This innovative and efficient model of short supply chain, contribute to the reduction of carbon emissions and the protection of the environment, for the benefit of the community.

Keywords: Short supply chain, social network, sustainable production, organic products, typical and local products.

Jel codes: Q13, Q18, Q01

  1. Abitabile, C., & Sardone, R. (a cura di) (2016). Il consumo sostenibile: dalla teoria alla pratica. Il caso dei prodotti biologici. Roma: crea.
  2. Akerlof, G.A. (1970). The Market for “Lemons”: Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84(3), 488-500. DOI: 10.2307/1879431
  3. Affronte, C. (2015), Fenomeno Kalulu, la filiera corta in salsa pop. -- https://ilsalvagente.it/2015/11/11/fenomeno-kalulu-la-filiera-corta-in-salsa-pop (Accessed March 15, 2019).
  4. Aubry, C., & Kebir, L. (2013). Shortening food supply chains: A means for maintaining agriculture close to urban areas? The case of the French metropolitan area of Paris. Food Policy, 41, 85-93.
  5. Bersanetti, F. (2017). Cambia la tavola degli italiani. In Ancc-Coop (a cura di). Rapporto Coop 2017 – Economia, consumi e stili di vita degli italiani di oggi (pp. 174-176), Roma.
  6. Boulstridge, E., & Carrigan, M. (2000). Do consumers really care about corporate responsibility: highlighting the attitude-behaviour gap?. Journal of Communication Management, 4(4), 355-368.
  7. Brown, E., Dury, S., & Holdsworth, M. (2009). Motivations of consumers that use local, organic fruit and vegetable box schemes in Central England and Southern France. Appetite, 53(2), 183-188.
  8. Brunori, G., & Galli, F. (2017). Filiera corta e politiche alimentari: quali scenari? Agriregionieuropa, 13 (50), 46-49.
  9. Carbone, A. (2016). Shaping food supply chains to enhance product quality. Rivista di Economia Agraria, 71(1), 19-29. DOI: 10.13128/REA-18622
  10. Chiffoleau, Y. (2009). From Politics to Co-operation: The Dynamics of Embeddedness in Alternative Food Supply Chains. Sociologia ruralis, 49(3), 218-235.
  11. De Leo, S. (2010). I processi produttivi: una prima analisi delle principali fasi agronomiche per un’agricoltura sostenibile ed eco-compatibile. In Briamonte,
  12. L., & Pergamo, R. (a cura di). I metodi di produzione sostenibile nel sistema agroalimentare (pp. 19-27). Roma: inea.
  13. European Commission (EC) (2010). europe 2020. A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. Communication from the Commission. com (2010) 2020 final.
  14. European Commission (EC) (2011). A resource-efficient Europe – Flagship initiative under the Europe 2020 Strategy. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. com (2011) 21 final.
  15. European Commission (EC) (2015), Closing the loop – An EU action plan for the Circular Economy. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. COM (2015) 614 final.
  16. European Commission (EC) (2019). Towards a sustainable Europe by 2030. Reflection Paper COM (2019) 22 final.
  17. European Economic and Social Committee (eesc) (2012). Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Promotion of sustainable production and consumption in the EU’ (exploratory opinion). Official Journal of the European Union, C 191 (55). 29 June 2012.
  18. Fabris, G. (2010). La societa post-crescita. Consumi e stili di vita. Milano: Egea.
  19. Fonte, M., & Cucco, I. (2017). Cooperatives and alternative food networks in Italy. The long road towards a social economy in agriculture. Journal of Rural Studies, 53, 291-302.
  20. Forno, F., Grasseni, C., & Signori, S. (2015). Nuove esperienze di coeducazione al consumo responsabile: il caso dei Gruppi di acquisto solidale. In Mascia, M., & Tintori, C. (a cura di), Nutrire il pianeta? Per un’alimentazione giusta, sostenibile, conviviale (pp. 65-77). Milano: Bruno Mondadori.
  21. Galli, F. & Brunori, G. (Ed.) (2013). Short Food Supply Chains as drivers of sustainable development. Evidence Document. Document developed in the framework of the FP7 project foodlinks (GA No. 265287). Laboratorio di studi rurali Sismondi.
  22. Giare, F., & Giuca, S. (Ed.) (2013). Farmers and short chain, legal profiles and socio-economic dynamics. Rome: inea.
  23. Giuca, S. (2015). La filiera corta: un approccio responsabile al consumo tra tradizione e innovazione. In Mascia, M., & Tintori, C. (a cura di). Nutrire il pianeta? Per un’alimentazione giusta, sostenibile, conviviale (pp. 40-52): Milano: Bruno Mondadori.
  24. Goodman, D., DuPuis, E.M., & Goodman, M.K. (2012). Alternative Food Networks: Knowledge, Place and Politics. London-New York: Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9780203804520
  25. Holloway, L., Kneafsey, M., Venn, L., Cox, R., Dowler, E., & Tuomainen, H. (2007). Possible Food Economies: a Methodological Framework for Exploring Food Production – Consumption Relationships. Sociologia Ruralis, 47(1), 1-19.
  26. Jahn, G., Schramm, M., & Spiller, A. (2005). The Reliability of Certification: Quality Labels as a Consumer Policy Tool. Journal of Consumer Policy, 28(1), 53-73.
  27. Kneafsey, M., Venn, L., Schmutz, U., Balazs, B., Trenchard, L., Eyden-Wood, T., Bos, E., Sutton, G., & Blackett, M. (2013). Short Food Supply Chains and Local Food Systems in the EU. A State of Play of their Socio-Economic Characteristics.
  28. JRC Scientific and Policy Reports. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. DOI: 10.2791/88784
  29. Krueger, R.A., & Casey, M.A. (2015). Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research. 5th Edition, Thousand Oaks, California: sage.
  30. LeCool Roma (2019). Kalulu. Interviste. -- http://roma.lecool.com/interviews/kalulu(Accessed March 15, 2019).
  31. Marino, D. (a cura di) (2016). Agricoltura urbana e filiere corte. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  32. Marino, D., & Cicatiello, C. (a cura di) (2012). I farmers’ market: la mano visibile del mercato. Aspetti economici, sociali e ambientali delle filiere corte. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  33. Moraca, S. (2016). Kalulu, il social che accorcia la filiera e avvicina produttore e consumatore. The Food makers. -- https://thefoodmakers.startupitalia.eu/56504-20160822-kalulu-food-gas (Accessed March 15, 2019).
  34. Nielsen (2018). Consumi: Nielsen individua i 5 nuovi profili di acquisto degli italiani. Comunicato stampa 14.02.2018. -- www.nielsen.com/it/it/press-room/2018/consumi--nielsen-individua-i-5-nuovi-profili-di-acquisto-degli-i.html (Accessed March 15, 2019).
  35. Pascucci, S. (2008). Agricoltura periurbana e strategie di sviluppo rurale: una riflessione. QA-Rivista dell’Associazione Rossi-Doria, 2, 127-151.
  36. Petrillo, F. (2011). I processi evolutivi della realta agricola/rurale: conseguenze, problematicita, strategie pianificatorie. Agriregionieuropa, 7(24), 61-63.
  37. Preiss, P., Charao-Marques, F. & Wiskerke, J.S.C. (2017). Fostering Sustainable Urban-Rural Linkages through Local Food Supply: A Transnational Analysis of Collaborative Food Alliances. Sustainability, 9(1155), 1-30.
  38. Rai Cultura Economia (2015). Call4Innovators: le migliori startup laziali al Vivaio delle Idee in Expo. -- www.economia.rai.it/articoli/call4innovators-le-miglioristartup-laziali-al-vivaio-delle-idee-in-expo/31331/default.aspx (Accessed March 15, 2019).
  39. Regione Lazio (2015). Da Expo a Rai Economia le startup innovative del Lazio. -- www.increscita.it/news/da_expo_a_rai_economia_le_startup_innovative_del_lazio-178 (Accessed March 15, 2019).
  40. Regione Lazio & Lazio Innova (2016). Marker Fire 2016. Catalogo. -- www.lazioinnovatore.it/fiere (Accessed March 15, 2019).
  41. Renting, H., Marsden, T.K., &, Banks, J. (2003). Understanding Alternative Food Networks: Exploring the Role of Short Food Supply Chains in Rural Development. Environment and Planning A, 35, 393-411.
  42. Risi, E. (2017). Kalulu, prodotti locali e genuini alla portata di tutti. -- www.italiachecambia.org/2017/05/kalulu-prodotti-locali-genuini-portata-di-tutti (Accessed March 15, 2019).
  43. Sabene, E. (2017). Kalulu, Organizzazione della domanda sul web: un caso pratico. Workshop “Piano di azione nazionale (PAN) per l’uso sostenibile dei prodotti fitosanitari: il ruolo dei PSR e dell’Agricoltura biologica”, 26-27 ottobre 2017, Firenze. -- www.reterurale.it/pan/firenze2017 (Accessed March 15, 2019).
  44. Sabene, E., & Scrocca, G. (2019). Kalulu. La filiera piu corta che c’e. Workshop “Incontra Kalulu”, March 11, 2019, “Millepiani”, Roma.
  45. Seyfang, G., & Smith, A. (2007). Grassroots innovations for sustainable development: Towards a new research and policy agenda. Environmental Politics, 16(4), 584-603. DOI: 10.1080/09644010701419121
  46. Terra! Onlus (2018). Magna Roma. Perche nel comune agricolo piu grande d’Italia i mercati rionali stanno morendo. -- www.terraonlus.it/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Magna-Roma_web.pdf (Accessed March 15, 2019).
  47. Torjusen, H., Lieblein, G., & Vitterso, G. (2008). Learning, Communicating and Eating in Local Food-Systems: The Case of Organic Box Schemes in Denmark and Norway. Local Environment, 13(3), 219-234. DOI: 10.1080/13549830701669252
  48. Torquati, B., Vigano, E., & Taglioni, C. (2016). Construction of Alternative Food Networks for organic products: A case study of ‘Organized Groups of Supply and Demand’. New Medit, 15(4), 53-62.
  49. United Nations (UN) (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015.
  50. United Nations (UN) (2019). Goal 12: Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns. -- www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-consumption-production (Accessed March 15, 2019).
  51. Van der Ploeg, J.D., Renting, H., Brunori, G., Knickel, K., Mannion, J., Marsden, T., & Ventura, F. (2000). Rural development: from practices and policies towards theory. Sociologia ruralis, 40(4), 391-408. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9523.00156
  52. Vigano, E., Antonelli, G., Bischi, G.I, & Tramontana, F. (2015). Consumo e consumatori di prodotti alimentari nella societa postmoderna. Economia agroalimentare, 17(1), 59-80. DOI: 10.3280/ECAG2015-001004
  53. Vulcano, G., & Ciccarese, L. (2018) Food wastage: a systemic approach for structural prevention and reduction. Rapporti 279/2018. Rome: ispra – Institute for Environmental Protection and Research.

  • Resilience and Digitalization in Short Food Supply Chains: A Case Study Approach Rosario Michel-Villarreal, Eliseo Luis Vilalta-Perdomo, Maurizio Canavari, Martin Hingley, in Sustainability /2021 pp.5913
    DOI: 10.3390/su13115913
  • Sustainable transition and food democracy: The role of decision making process in Solidarity Purchasing Groups Gustavo Magalhães de Oliveira, Gaetano Martino, Chiara Riganelli, Michela Ascani, in Economia agro-alimentare 2/2022 pp.1
    DOI: 10.3280/ecag2022oa13053
  • A Bibliometric Analysis of Short Supply Chains in the Agri-Food Sector Giannis T. Tsoulfas, Panagiotis Trivellas, Panagiotis Reklitis, Anna Anastasopoulou, in Sustainability /2023 pp.1089
    DOI: 10.3390/su15021089

Sabrina Giuca, Simonetta De Leo, A social network linking rural and peri-urban agricultural production to the city of Rome: A case study in "ECONOMIA AGRO-ALIMENTARE" 2/2019, pp 507-522, DOI: 10.3280/ECAG2019-002016